VOL. 45, No.

Medical His/olr)

379

Howard University, will spend five months as a civilian scientist with the U. S. Naval Medical Research Unit No. 3 in Egypt and the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan, in a study of the role of arthroped vectors in the transmission of diseases in the Middle East. Dr. Briscoe is assigned to the divisions of parasitology and medical entomology of the Naval Unit. During World War II, Dr. Briscoe spent considerable time on military duty in Liberia, where he pursued a number of scientific studies which serve as excellent background for his present assignment. DR. JOHN B. JOHNSON, professor and head of the Department of Medicine in Howard University, was guest lecturer at the "Summer School" sponsored annually by the Columbia Broadcasting Company for children of 10-14 years of age, on July 23 in Philadelphia, Pa. The television broadcast was made directly from the outdoor school which is held on the grounds of TV Station WCAU. Dr. Johnson's lecture illustrated with demonstrations was on "Man's Conquest of Disease." This was one in the series of discussions on the general theme of the school for 1953. "Man's Conquests." DR. T. WILKINs DAVIS (M.D., Howard, '45), assistant professor of radiology in Howard University has announced the opening of offices for practice limited to radiology at 1114 W Street, N.W., Washington 9, D. C., suite 4. DR. ROBERT E. LEE (M.D., Howard, '4) has announced the opening of his office for the practice of general surgery at 3435 Bennig Road, N.E., Washington 19, D. C. The India Association of Chicago, Illinois, entertained at a Indian style dinner party in honor of DR. ULYSSES GRANT DAILEY on July 12 in the Assembly Hall at the Internation House. Dr. Dailey spoke informally on "Impressions on India with Special Reference to Progress in the Medical Field."

HISTORYO

DR. DANIEL HALE WILLIAMS, whose portrait on the cover of this issue of the Journal was drawn by our staff artist, Mrs. Naida Willette Page, is one of the most outstanding medical figures the American Negro has produced. He was long famed as the first physician to operate on the human heart and received the significant recognition of being the only Negro to be admitted to the American College of Surgeons at the time of its formation in 1913. His cardiac operation was actually a suturing of the pericardium performed in 1893 and reported in print in 1897. Miss Helen Buckley of New York, who undertook a biography of Dr. Williams because of the potential public interest in the fact that a Negro doctor was the first to perform a surgical procedure on the heart or its sac, deprived him of this priority. Her careftul research discovered two cases which antedated Dr. Williams' by some months. Her publishers

thereupon regrettably lost interest and her book has never appeared. Dr. Williams' distinction, however, loses no lustre because his priority in the cardiac matter has been erased and racial bars in the American College of Surgeons have been removed. This permits the focus of attention solely upon his great contributions as a gifted surgeon, a pioneer in the establishment of hospitals and nurse training schools, a skillful administrator and innovator, and a clinical teacher. His unquestioned ability, his integrity and his social vision caused him to be acknowledged, even by those not particularly friendly, the greatest Negro doctor of his day. In personality he was ill adapted for both the rough and tumble and the nuances of the several political elements which inevitably obtruded upon his professional career. Consequently, his life was marked by much outward strife and inner discontent. Dan Williams is eminently worthy of serious biographical study. The sketches which have appeared have been either limited in data,' length2 or scope,' or else obviously biased in attitude.4 It is certain that objective appraisal of either the man or his contributions would have been difficult to obtain from his contemporaries. This is true today with respect to those who were familiar with his milieu. The late Dr. Numa P. G. Adams, when dean of Howard Medical School, after considerable effort located Dr. Williams poorly marked grave in a Chicago cemetery. He tried for a time to arouse interest in erecting a suitable memorial, but to the writer's knowledge, nothing came of this. Some of Dr. Williams surgical instruments, a diploma and other incunabula are on display in a case in the lobby of Chicago's Provident Hospital, which he founded. Only the Daniel Hale Williams Medical Reading Club of Washington, D. C., a socio-scientific organization, preserves his name in professional circles. It is of collateral interest that the current and long-time president of this Club is Dr. John W. Lawlah, a former superintendent of Provident Hospital. A man so unusual as Dr. Williams deserves much better of posterity. The writer does not know the contents of Miss Buckley's biography, but he is aware of the pains to which she went in gathering material for it. It is unlikely that she would have been given a contract by a first-rate publisher in the absence of convincing evidence of her ability to produce a work of the proper scholarship. Since this book has been written, therefore, it would be indeed tragic if some auspices, Negro professional or otherwise, could not be found to publish it. Daniel Hale Williams was born in Hollidaysburg, Pennsylvania, January 18, 1858, the sixth of seven children of Daniel and Sarah Price Williams.2 Concerning his earliest years, there is frank and irreconcilable discrepancy between the accounts of Dailey2 and Bousfield,4 both of whom were Chicago physicians who knew Dr. Williams and were intimately familiar with the historical development of Provident Hospital there. Dailey states that young Dan attended school at his birthplace and later at Annapolis and Baltimore, Maryland, follow-

380

JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL MEDICAL ASSOCIATION

SEPTENfBER, 1953

ing which the "family" moved to Janesville, Wisconsin. Bousfield says that somehow his mother brought him to Janesville, Wisconsin, as a ragged urchin of five and abandoned him in the home of the Charles Andersons, where she had been taken in for shelter, after which nothing was ever heard from Sarah Williams again.* Obviously one of these accounts is wrong. There is no doubt that the Williamses were at one time located in the Annapolis-Baltimore area. One of Dr. Williams sisters, Miss Alice Williams, was the writer's kindergarten teacher in Washington and as she passed his home on the way to school, at his parents request she allowed him to walk to school with her every morning. Hence he knew and remembers her very well indeed. Another sister, Miss Bessie Williams, was a seamstress in Freedmen's Hospital from the writer's early childhood until shortly before her death in the thirties(?). The writer's father, now eighty-four, knew Dr. Williams and both sisters, and the community impression was that there were more children than these three and that these Williamses came from somewhere near Washington. This is compatible with the association Dailey makes with Annapolis and Baltimore. Miss Alice Williams, the writer's teacher, was a person of marked ability, culture and refinement and of the highest moral character. She reflected excellent background and training. Her sister of humbler station, while not as well educated was well mannered and highly respected. This remained true when the writer was an interne at Freedmen's in 1929-30. These facts indicate that Dan was by no means what we would consider an abandoned waif. In the uncertainties and tensions of that Civil War period, the family might easily have been disrupted and Dan brought to Wisconsin alone by his mother, at an age which needs confirmation. Certainly, significant facts are missing about a period of early childhood which was of great importance in the formation of Dr. Williams' character. However, Dan was carried as a child to Janesville, Wisconsin, a small town about thirteen miles from the Illinois state line, where he lived with the only colored family in town, the Andersons, until 1880. It seems that they were a remarkable family.4 They reared three children of their own, one of whom became a leading dentist in St. Louis, another a successful physician in Chicago, while the third was a hospital administrator, newspaper editor and poet. In addition to Dr. Williams, they also had as a protege, Dr. Charles E. Bentley, who became an outstanding dentist and civic leader in Chicago.4 In Janesville young Dan attended first the Janesville High School (1873) and later Hare's Academy (1877).1 He studied law for a year2 and played the bass viol in a well known band of his foster father4 until he came under the influence of local physician, Dr. Henry Palmer, a Civil War veteran who had been a Major and
*

Surgeon of Volunteers. Encouraged by Mr. Anderson he then decided to study medicine and served two years as an apprentice in Dr. Palmer's office (1878-80). In the latter year he entered Chicago Medical College, now the medical school of Northwestern University, on the advice of his preceptor' and financed by the Andersons.4 He received the M.D. from Northwestern in 1883 and served a year's interneship in Mercy Hospital in Chicago, a Catholic institution which John B. Murphy was making famous. Following this he entered practice in Chicago and was straightway appointed surgeon to the South Side Dispensary and Demonstrator of Anatomy at Northwestern Medical School. He numbered among his pupils there many who later became leaders in the profession. In 1887 Dr. Williams was appointed a member of the Illinois State Board of Health and reappointed in 1891. In that same year, only eight years after his graduation from medical school, he founded the Provident Hospital at 29th and Dearborn Streets. This is said to have been the first real hospital in the U-nited States to be operated by Negroes.* As significant a step as the establishment of the hospital was that of the school of nursing set-up in connection with it. There were few colored nurses in those days and the existing schools in Chicago would not admit Negro applicants. Dr. Williams interested many wealthy and influential white personages5 of the city in the venture which was Provident Hospital. Among them were George M. Pullman, Phillip D. Armour, George Webster, Marshall Field, J. Ogden Armour, Cyrus H. McCormick, and Potter Palmer. The staff was composed of both white and Negro physicians and the patients were largely white. As colored interns were seldom available most of these were white for a period of fifteen years and a white superintendent of nurses was in charge until after 1909, when the hospital was still being used as a teaching unit of Northwestern Medical School. Dr. Williams entered medical school as a new era in surgery was beginning. Billings, Franklin H. Martin, Charles S. Bacon and E. Wyllis Andrews were among the men in school with him.2 His preceptor, Dr. Henry Palmer, was appointed professor of operative surgery, clinical surgery and surgical pathology on the first faculty of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Chicago when this was established in 1881. In 1900 this institution became the College of Medicine of the University of Illinois.' Having had the best training available at the time, reinforced by a thorough foundation in anatomy acquired during his teaching service at Northwestern, Dr. Williams became an exemplary surgeon under the stimulus of the atmosphere at the time and the brilliant associates with whom he had contact. Dailey says that, "his surgical work was marked by profound anatomical knowledge, a thorough understanding of physiology, normal and pathological, and an uncanny surgical judgment. Although much of his work was done in the amphitheatre, he
This widely accepted claimi may have to undergo some revision accord;ng to data in the editor's lian(ls wvhicli he has not yet hiad time to investigate thoroughly.

Dailey gives 1856 as the hirthdlate and Farmer and(1 Bousfield 1858. The A.MNI.A. Directory says 18.58. Dailey spells the mother's tiame "Sarah" and(l Bousfield "Sara."

VOL. 45, No. 5

Medical History

381

never lost sight of the supreme interest of the patient, in an appeal to the spectacular. As an operator, his attention to technical detail was meticulous. He was the methodical, rather than the virtuose type of surgeon."2 He was already an operator of surpassing skill when in 1893, ten years out of medical school, he performed the procedure which immediately brought him international fame. This acclaim was achieved through the public press as he did not report the operation until 1897 when it was described in the New York Medical Record for that year under the title "Stab Wound of the Heart and Pericardium-Suture of the Pericardium. Suture of the Pericardium, Recovery-Patient Alive Three Years Afterward." In 1949 the writer, through the courtesy of the late Dr. Carl G. Roberts, was able to reproduce in the Bulletin of the Medico-Chirurgical Society of the District of Columbia") a facsimile of the newspaper article in the Daily Inter Ocean for Saturday morning, July 22, 1893. The caption of the article read as follows: SEWED UP HIS HEART-Remarkable Surgical Operation on a Colored Man-At Provident Hospital-Dr. Williams Performs an Astonishing Feat-A Puncture in the Vital Organ Exposed and Dressed with Success." The account fills two columns in the newspaper and contains a complete description. It also gives due praise to Provident Hospital, its staff and work. A statement in the article is worth quoting here.
Dr. \V!illiamiis, the clhief surgeon, sai(d yester(lday that he anti hiis assistanits were sometimiies calle(d oni to l)erfornl difficult operations whichi would tlot have beeni attempted itn anly liospital teni years ago, andl success crownied their efforts in aIlIost every case. For the beniefit of the uninformed, these facts in regartd to the a(lvancement of the colored race along tlhe litnes of educationi anti( science ought to be l)ublislled far aln(I widle.

tion of Williams' claim was sharply and successfully challenged by Dr. Charles H. Garvin of Cleveland, currently a member of the Editorial Board of the Journal. Dr. Garvin received an affirmation of the dates of Williams' operation and publication from Major Edgar Erskine Hume, librarian of the Army Medical Library. This was amplified in a subsequent letter from Dr. Hume to Dr. John A. Kenney confirming the priority. The entire matter was fully reported by Dr. Kenney in an editorial in this Journal in November 1935.6 Dr. Kenney was even at pains to check and re-confirm the facts by a personal search in the Surgeon General's Library in 1943.7 Dr. Williams' patient in this case was not only living three years after the operation but survived for fifty years. We are told he died in 1943, having out-lived his surgeon by twelve years. The late Dr. Frederick D. Stubbs of Philadelphia examined him forty-seven years after the operation and published photographs clearly showing the scar, in this Journal.8 In 1893 Dr. Williams went to Washington as Surgeonin-Chief of Freedmen's Hospital, by appointment of President Grover Cleveland. He remained in this post until 1898, when it was made politically untenable for him. At Freedmen's he made some of his most important contributions and he left the institution in large measure a monument to his efforts. He effected a complete reorganization of the surgical services and established a nursing school. But let us now take our story in part from an eye-witness, Dr. William A. Warfield, Sr., one of the men whom Dr. Williams trained, who was later himself to serve as Surgeon-inChief of Freedmen's for thirty-five years. In a letter to Dr. John A. Kenney in 19419 Dr. Warfield wrote:
Before Dr. 1). H. WN'illiams caine to the hospital, in 1894. there was nio real surgical departmetnt. I was at the hospital three years before Dr. NV'illiams and witnessed most of the surgical work, suclh as amputations of the thigh, leg, foot nlnd toes. Herniotomy, occasionally. Other surgical work oni hydrocele, lhetmlorrhoi(ds, fisttula in ano. strictture of the urethra aind lacerated wounids; (lislocations anld a few fractures, about covered the field. In those days the field of operation was slprayed with a weak solution of carbolic acid and the ligatures in the case of an amlputation were left long enouglt to hanig out of the lower end of the wound to rot off. WN'e bleard much of "laudable pus," and there was much of it. Slhortly after the arrival of Dr. WN illiamiis a sterilizer was provided in this way. A wash-boiler, a miietal strip full of many one incit lioles to rest on iron blocks about six inclies from its bottom to keel) the materials to be sterilized above water. Fractionial sterilizationi was in vogue. Two hours the first day, onle hour the second day anid onie half the tliird (lay. Later the steamii sterilizer came. It can be said that surgical dlevelol)ment began with the arrival of Dr. XVilliams. in all forms esp)ecially ad(lominal. That is w here I got my start and inspiration. I recall that Dr. Robert Reyburn wlio was the first Siurgeoni-in-Chief of the hospital came into the operating room when Dr. WN'illiams was performing anl abdominal operation, anti remarked with much joy that the "time had at last arrived wlhen it is p)ossible to penetrate the abdomen without fear." At first the amputated stuml) was lheld on the outside of tlhe abdlominal wvall by imeanls of two skewers penetrating the stuml) crosswvise. The poor patient was kept flat oni lier back 21 days. The

The article was an ideal example of clinical reporting. In January 1945, the writer, as secretary of the Daniel Hale Williams Reading Club, which was organized in 1929, presented verbatim mimeographed copies of Williams' report to each member of the Club. This was love's labor lost. A year afterward hardly one could be located. Dr. Williams stated that he did not report the case sooner because of illness at about the time of the patient's recovery and the change of duties to his position at Freedmen's Hospital. With the patient alive three and onehalf years afterward, he stated that as the catalogue

and index medicus of the Surgeon-General's library did

not give a single title descriptive of the pericardium or the heart, he felt that it was desirable to record the case. There was also an acknowledgement to Dr. Daniel Smith Lamb, pathologist of the Army Medical Museum and professor of anatomy at Howard Medical School, through whose courtesy Dr. Williams had examined all the specimens of pericardium and heart wounds in the Museum. In none of these had there been any history

of operation. Until Miss Buckley's negating finding, Dr. Williams' priority for the cardiac operation was not contested but gencrally ignored. In 1935 a particularly pointed rejec-

382

JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL MEDICAL ASSOCIATION

SEPTEMBER, 1953

dressings were clhangedl daily, and the stump finally dried or rotted off. Ere long all this changed and many advances made. 1)r. Williams was lprogressive. He visited Jolhns Hopkins hospital frequently, anid it was my goo(d fortune to accompany Iiim, where he foun( l)rs. Kelly, Halstead, Young and others very helpful. Dr. Williams established a training school for nurses, replacing the old red bandanna nurse. He al)pointed the first interns and hrouglit into existence a horse ambulance. He was layinig the foun(lation for more and better surgical work. By the time lie left the hospital, in 1897 a great imlpetus had been given to all branches of surgery, excelt brain. I was particularly fond of abdominal work and was greatly encouragecl by )r. WN'illiams. I never missed an opportunity.

As an example of opinion which did not approve of Dr. Williams, a paragraph may be cited from a letter written by his predecessor, Dr. Charles Burleigh Purvis, in 1908 to Mr. Wilbur P. Thirkield, president of Howard University, to orient the latter gentleman on the history

of Freedmen's Hospital.10
I held the position. for over thirteen years when I was

remiioved by the Secretary of the Interior, MIr. Hoke Smith, of Georgia, for political reasons. A d(emocrat was appointed to succeed me. This was the first time the institutioni was made a plolitical one. Argumiient, and the fact that it was transferred from the WNar Department to the Department of
the Inlterior by the influence of the relpresentatives of Howard University, had no effect. The claims of the university were ignored. The niew Surgeon-in-Chief caused imiuch trouble as lie lpersistently souglht to force himself inito the faculty of the college to be a lprofessor of surgery and made it quite clear that unless his ambitioni was gratified the college could n-ot expect very maniy a(lvantages or favors from the hospital. He was not equilplpedl for the work of a teacher in anzy sense. He was arbitrary. anid wilfully lie (hestroyed a training school for tnurses establishe(d by the college and starte(d aniother. He served four years an(d was succee(led by a Dr. Curtis.

We cannot enter here upon the obviously bitter elements contributing to this strong expression of sentiment. The record, however, belies Dr. Purvis' allegation that Dr. Williams was not equipped to be a teacher. The evidence is all to the contrary, as we shall see. No one anywhere at any time denied Dr. Williams' ability. If it be true, as is probable, that he desired faculty status in Howard Medical School, this was certainly a reasonable expectation as all the other superintendents of Freedmen's from Reyburn on, and including Purvis, had such status. One senses tacit conspiracy against Williams. A noteworthy measure by Dr. Williams at Freedmen's to establish public confidence in the Negro surgeon was the operations which he opened for the public to watch.31 In those days people had not become accustomed to Negro doctors and did not trust them thoroughly. This was especially true in the case of the Negro surgeon. Many Negro patients dreaded to cross the threshold of any hospital. Often the mere thought of an operation tended to strike terror into the heart of a patient and the relatives, and the approachi of medical attendants would provoke screams. Dr. Williams took the boldest and most thoroughgoing step possible for one who would combat this irrational fear. He threw open the doors of his operating room once a week to the public and said in effect, "Come watch us work, observe conditions and see for yourself that there is nothing to be afraid of."

It required courage thus to thrust aside convention. Only confidence would invite critical public inspection of the equipment, arrangements, routine and decorum in the operating room. Surgical performance before all comers under definitely adverse circumstances bespeaks a cool competence which none ever dared deny. For a number of Sunday afternoons at two o'clock, it was the privilege of any layman interested to watch a skilled Negro surgical team at work. The operations were performed in the amphitheater which had been built on to the rear of the old medical building. This building housed the Howard University medical, dental, and pharmaceutical schools, and the hospital administrative offices and internes. The patients were brought through a closed passageway from and to one of the adjacent frame hospital buildings. This surgical amphitheater was later used as the anatomical theater until the new medical building was opened in 1927. When the old building was remodeled, the site of Dr. Williams' historic experiment became part of the present dental infirmary. It was not to be expected that so startling an innovation as public operations would fail to arouse powerful opposition. This opposition, indeed, appears eventually to have forced an end to what can now be interpreted as a noble and far-sighted effort in public education. As to the objections to Dr. Williams' measure that it involved an invasion of the right of the patient to privacy, and that it constituted unethical self-advertisement, it may be answered first, that except for the small aperture in the sheets over the site of incision, there is practically no exposure of a patient prepared for major operation. The patient is not recognizable to spectators. On the other hand, a layman should be greatly impressed with the professional dignity and extreme care for the patient which marks any properly conducted operation. No brief need be made for public operations as a general practice, but it must be admitted that Dr. Williams took the most direct and forceful means possible to destroy the public fear he faced. The charge of self-aggrandizement is petty, secondary and impossible of verification, but if it could be proved true, it would not detract from the fact of an excellence which invited the critical attention of all comers. Unfortunately, we do not have any statement of the objectives of the open surgical amphitheater by Dr. Williams himself, nor a comprehensive account of the reactions produced. It is to be hoped that biographic research may bring to light something of value in this connection. The few local witnesses available of any of these operations report the surgeon to have been a careful, undemonstrative worker of few words, who impressed with his competence. Details of the opposition also are not at hand. It is said that the performance of a curettage at one of the open periods was severely critized as improper, and that the superintendent of nurses and operating room nurses finally refused to cooperate, bringing the series to a close. Available evidence is inadequate for appraisal of

VOL. 45, No. 5

Medical History

383

these aspects of the case. Basic issues are often beclouded by secondary considerations. We know that Dr. Williams faced a problem in securing routine observance of proper discipline and decorum among the personnel of Freedmen's Hospital. One of measures he used to inculcate in personnel the proper self-respect and dignity was uniforms for the internes, which had to be worn at all times when on duty. These were of dark blue color, with a white arm band bearing a red cross. They have been shown in photographs in this Journal.1l, 9 We do not have the particulars of the circumstances which caused Dr. Williams to relinquish his post at Freedmen's. He was succeeded by a surgeon he had helped train, Dr. Austin Maurice Curtis, late professor of surgery in Howard Medical School. From Freedmen's Dr. Williams returned to Chicago, but there was no room for him in Provident Hospital, the institution which he had founded. A surgeon of contrasting personality, Dr. George Cleveland Hall, was firmly in the saddle. Dr. Hall was said to have been a suave politician, friend of Booker T. Washington, a leader in the Urban League, clever diplomat and one who made friends easily and fought enemies ruthlessly. He was also a good surgeon with keen diagnostic ability. There seems unanimous agreement among commentators that Dr. Williams shunned a fight, not that he was disturbed by the dangers of combat but that his sense of the right and that merit should carry its own case made controversy abhorrent to him. In 1899 he began a memorable teaching experience. He was visited by Dr. George W. Hubbard, president of Meharry Medical College, who invited him to hold surgical clinics at Meharry. Shortly afterward he met Dr. Charles V. Roman of Meharry who tipped the balances in favor of acceptance of the invitation.'2 Dr. Roman called Dr. Williams "the bright and morning star in the firmament of surgery," and stated that his acceptance of this first invitation to come to Meharry was a "momentous event in the history of Meharry and a crucial turn in the career of the author (Roman) ." The annual Williams Clinics at Meharry were continued for many years and each was considered the great event of the school year. In addition to Dr. Roman, Dr. Williams worked with Dr. Robert Fulton Boyd, first president of the National Medical Association, on these occasions. These operative clinics were held in the Mercy Hospital in Nashville. Dr. John A. Kenney met Dan Williams in 1903 at the Convention of the National Medical Association in Nashville. Here Kenney read a paper on "Shock" which, so impressed Dr. Williams that he invited Kenney to be his anesthetist for operations at that session. The arrangement was so satisfactory that Dr. Williams arranged with Meharry for Dr. Kenney to spend a week there eaclh year to administer his anesthetics for the patients in his operative cliniCS. 3 At about the time of his first visit to Meharry, which appointed him visiting clinical professor of surgery, Dr. Williams was invited to the Knoxville Medical College

in Knoxville, Tennessee, which was established in 1895. It is implied that he may have been in residence there for a time.' This institution conferred upon him the title of professor of theory and practice of medicine and clinical medicine and director of bacteriological laboratory. He read his first published paper in Knoxville before the East Tennessee Medical Society on the treatment of retroverted uterus. From 1900 to 1906 Dr. Williams was an attending surgeon at the Cook County Hospital in Chicago. Here he worked on the service of Dr. Christian Fenger, the great pathologist surgeon to whose inspiration and work, Dailey says, all of that generation of surgeons in the middle west bore testimony. Dr. Williams was a great admirer of Fenger and from the anecdotes and quotations in his clinical lectures, Fenger's influence was clear and apparent.2 From 1912 until his death, Dr. Williams was associate attending surgeon at St. Luke's Hospital, one of Chicago's largest, wealthiest and most important hospitals.2 As time went on the breach between him and the authorities in control of Provident Hospital widened. According to the late Dr. Carl G. Roberts, as told to Dr. John W. Lawlah, he severed relations completely after a social incident. One evening there was a ladies entertainment at the home of Dr. George C. Hall, which Mrs. Williams attended. Dr. Williams called for his wife and the door was opened by Dr. Hall. Instead of inviting his fellow surgeon in, Dr. Hall told him to wait at the door, his wife would be with him in a minute. This was too much for Dr. Williams who thereafter withdrew more and more from social contacts and pursued his surgical work almost exclusively at St. Luke's. While in Washington, Dr. Williams met and married Miss Alice Johnson, a school teacher. It was a very lhappy marriage from which there were no children. Mrs. Williams preceded him in death by several years. Something of what Dan Williams personality was like may be gleaned from the published statements of two contemporaries who knew him well. Bousfield4 wrote: After D)an W'illiams graduate(d in m1e(licine, lie never hlad
aniiotlher single initerest in life. He save(d Iiis money and lput it into Providenit Hospital alonig witlh otlhers. He had great (letermiiinatiotn anid great conifidenice in himiiself. He had the niatural dexterity to imiake a surgeoni, and( lie woul(d operate all (lay lonig oil all kinds of cases witlhout exception, pay or nlo pay. So single-tracked w as lhis mind that lie couldl nlot biegin to cope with inietical politics. He hlad no stomnachl for a figlit-lie alwvays gave away before tlhat-twice at Provident anidh once at Free(dmiietn's. He ma(le few close frienids, if aiiy at all, excel)t Feinger. He was onice expelled frolmi a fraternial organiization at the very lhey (lay of lhis success. He ha(d no a(hiiiirers in the Aniderson famiiily, wvlicli lie seems to lhave forgotten promptly after lie got out of sclhool. His wife wvas the onie fine thing inl his life. They imiainitainied a (quietly eleganit lhomiie, with a Swedish niai(l. whlo serveth themii vell for years. and(I it was a real treat to miieet and receive the gracious courtesy of 'Mrs. WN'illiamiis. Even D)an woul(d lose imiuchl of hiis preoccupation and boorishness before lher. But lie (Irew nmore an(d iiiore within himliself and seemiied to hiave iio interest in formiier associates onice lie miiove(d inito iiew surroundings. No imiani ever miiade less effort to iiiake frienids. In 1909 I visite(d himin to ask ahout going to Freedniieni's as aii intern. He told miie that lie would ratlher see a boy of hlis selling, newvsp)aiers oni the street. I wveit aiiysvav, aiid D)an

384

JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL MEDICAL ASSOCIATION

SEPTEMBER, 1953

was wrong. He ha(d had ani unfortuniate administrative experience and tnotlhing about the place suited him. He drove ani electric cabriolet, one of those glisteninig glassed-in show cases wlhich have entirely disappeared witl the development of high-speed motors, but when it rained, I)an came down town on the street car. Quite early in life, perhaps because he had no children of his own, he began to ask plarents to name a child for himii. He would then lpromptly forget all about it. In one inistance, closely related to such a family, he went on a two-montlh's vacationi. W\'hen lie came back after this brief initerlude, Dan called his grown-ulp namesake "Johni." John, now a miian of fifty or more, has niever forgiven him and is generally not known to have beeni christened Daniel Hale. He uses the initials 1). H., but all his friends know Iitin by quite another name of his own choice. Making money nlever was a maini initerest with Dan WN'illiams. He toured the country teachiing surgery wherever lie had a chance. He started as a denionstrator of anatomy at Northwestern, but finally gave much more time to a visiting clinical professorship} at MIeharry. He was constantly attending a great number of medical meetings all over the South, and was much adiiiired as a teacher. He cared for nothing else. His wife died first, and as there were no children he left whatever estate lie possessed to the Catholic C(hurch for the repose of his restless and disgruntled soul.

Williams, his insl)iration and encouragemenit to study medicine. For a quarter of a century Dr. Williams made pilgrimages as lecturer and operator to the annual meetings of the Negro medical societies of the South and to the Meharry Medical College at Nashville. Here he not only taught scientific medicinie an(d surgery by precept and example, but encouraged the founding of hospitals and training schools. His greatest lpride was that, directly or indirectly, he had a hand in the making of most of the outstatnding Negro surgeons of the current generation.

Different impressions will be obtained from the comments of Dailey2 who was a better qualified observer:
Like all great men, Dr. WN'illiams was a iiian of strong

itndividuality. He was ne-erthieless modest and retiring, almost timnid at times. Occupying an entirely unique pilace in the Negro pirofession, lie was perhaps sensitive to his piosition. His highi rating in the surgical world broughit him unusual
contacts, social and otherwise, with his white confreres, some of whiclh were higlhly agreeable; others brought those mean iutmiliations which characterize the color situation in this country. These facts had much to do with a certain oversetnsitiveness and bitterness of spsirit whiclh developed in the later years of his life. But lie was remarkably self-containe(l. anld consistently strove to live above petty jealousies anti bickerings; and he did not allow the acid incidents of life to doniinate his character. In spite of his reserve, lie had strong convictions. and( maintained themii courageously. To his friends he was loyalty itself. 'Many of his friendships eIi(lure(l for forty years antI imiore. 'Mutual loyalty and devotion miiarked his imiarital life.
From what hias been sai(l, it is o0)b-ious that he was a medical

In 1909 Wilberforce University conferred the honorary degree of LL.D. upon him and in 1925 Howard University granted him an honorary M.S. It would seem that this was a very meager recognition on the part of the University to which he contributed so much through Freedmen's Hospital. Dr. Williams died in August 1931 at his summer home in Idlewild, Michigan, at the age of seventy-three. He had been diabetic. The writer has unverified information that Dr. Williams did not, as one source4 stated, leave all his money to the Catholic Church, but left significant bequests in securities to Meharry and Howard Medical Schools. The securities were rendered worthless by the Depression, so that nothing was heard about the legacies. The writer is keenly aware of the inadequacy of this account, but it does present more information on Dr. Williams than has hitherto been assembled in any single tribute. From what has been here set down there should be no doubt in any reader's mind that Dr. Williams deserves the attention of the full biography which Miss Buckley has written and much greater recognition than has yet been accorded his memory. W. MONTAGUE COBB
PUBLICATIONS OF DR. W'ILLIAMIS
1. The Treatment of the Retroverted Uterus with Special Reference to the Value of 'Massage and the Author's Application of the Uterine Respiratory 'Movement. Ann. Gynaec & Paediatry, 6, No. 12, 1893. 2. Stab Wvoun(l of the Heart and Pericardiunm: Suture of the Pericardium, Recovery-Patient Alive Three Years

missioniary, a veritable Aloses to the Negro profession. He

etijoyed to plhase of his busy life niiore than his annual trips to the South spreading highi scientific and ethical ideals of psrofessional work, to say nothilng of the priceless henefits of his skill to the sufferinig. It may be truly said that lie had a han(d in the making of imiost of the active negro surgeons of the piresent day: Curtis. WVarfield, Hale, WN'ilberforce \Williams, Stewart, Kenney, J)ailey, to name oinly a few. Although lie never boasted of it, it was a source of lride to him, and as one who was fairly close to hiim for a period of nearly twenity years, I believe lie considered this his most valuable contribution to hiis day and getneration.

Afterwards. Med. Rec., 51:437, 1897. 3. Ovarian Cysts in Colored Women with Notes on Relative Fre(luency of Fibromata in Both Cells. Phila. Med. Jour.. 6:1244, 1900. (See also Chicago Med. Rec. for

1897).
4. Anl Unusual Case of Fibromata Molluscuni. Phila. AMed. Jour. 5:404, 1900. .. T'he Need of Hospitals an(d Training Schools for Colored People of the South. Nat. Hosl. Rec., April, 1900, Detroit. 6. A Report of two Cases of Caesarean Sectioni Unpositive Inidications with Terminationi in Recovery. Am. J. Obst. (Gyn., 42:315, 1901. 7. Penetrating Wounds of Chest, Perforating the Diaphragm

In another place Dailey14 wrote: l)r. WN'illiams' practice knew no bounds of color, and for matiy years he had, in a(ldition to that at Proviident, a large
private service at the St. Luke's Hospital. 'More imnportant than Ihis vast surgical practice, his contributionis to imiedical science, and his honors. was lhis role as inspiration an(l iiie(lical missionary to ani entire profession. \\'lien l)r. 'Nilliams began piractice, an(d for many years after, lie stood alonie as a surgeon. Maiiy a Negro boy in the nineties an(d the early ninteteen hutndre(ds, owves to the iiaiiie Daniel H.

an(l Inivolvinig the Abdominal Viscera. Anni. Surg. 40:675,

1904.

8. Unusually Large Pyosalpinx. !Surg. Gyn. Obst., 22:741,

1916.

9. The -Malingerer. N.Y.M.j., 103:673-720, 1916.

LITERATURE CITED

1. FARMER, H. Daniel Hale Williams, M.D., LL.D.,

F.A.C.S. Ann. Med. Hist. 3s 1:252-259, 1939.

VOL. 45, No. )

Sep/emnber, 1953

385

2. DAILEY, U. G. Daniel Hale Williams, M.D., LL.D., F.A.C.S. J. N. M. A., 23-173-175, 1931. 3. COBB, W. M. Daniel Hale Williams-Pioneer and Innovator. J. N. M. A., 34:158-159, 1944. 4. BOUSFIELD, M. 0. An Account of Physicians of Color in the United States. Bull. Hist. Med., 17:6184, 1945. 5. Facsimile of Contemporary Press Report of Pericardial Suture by Dr. D. H. Williams. Bull. Med. Soc. Dist. of Col., v. 6, No. 7, p. 11, Nov., 1949. 6. KENNEY, J. A. Dr. Daniel Williams Takes Priority in Successful Operation for Stab Wound of Human Heart. (Editorial). J. N. M. A., 27:162-163, 1935. 7. KENNEY, J. A. Priority for Suture of the Heart (Editorial). J. N. M. A., 35:171-172, 1943. 8. STUBBS, F. D. The Fundamental Physiologic Concepts Underlying Major Surgery of the Chest. J. N. M. A., 35:1, 1943. 9. COBB, W. M. William Alonza Warfield, 1866-1951. J. N. M. A., 44-206-219, 1952. 10. COBB, W. M. Charles Burleigh Purvis, 1842-1929. J. N. M. A., 45:79-82, 1953. 11. COBB, W. M. Internes of Freedmen's Hospital, 1897-98. J. N. M. A., 43:68-69, 1951. 12. ROMAN, C. V. History of Meharry Medical College. Sunday School Publishing Board of the National Baptist Convention, Inc., pp. 52, 71, 73, 1934. 13. COBB, W. M. John Andrew Kenney, M.D., 18741950, J. N. M. A., 42-175-177, 1950. 14. DAILEY. U. G. The Negro in Medicine, J. N. M. A., 34:118-119, 1942.

-BOOK REVIEWS
STUDIES IN VISUAL OPTICS by Joseph I. Pascal, B.S., M.A., O.D., M.D., Licentiate in Optometry and in Medicine by the University of the State of New York; Director of Eye Department, Stuyvesant Polyclinic; Attending Ophthalmologist, New York Polyclinic Medical School and Hospital, Outpatient Department; Lecturer in Ophthalmology, New York Polyclinic Medical School and Hospital. Illustrated. C. V. Mosby Co., St. Louis, 1952. 800 pp. $12.50. This technical treatise of 46 chapters and an appendix is a book for the professional ophthalmologist and optometrist. It is a very thorough treatise. Beginning with the optical characteristics of simple lenses and prisms it takes up in regular course all of the complex problems involved in understanding refraction phenomena in the human eye and the deviations and errors which require treatment. The mathematics essential to understanding the subjects presented is regularly introduced, but no more is used than is necessary. The volume is very adequately illustrated and would seem a comprehensive reference for those who are working in this field and for the slow absorption of the general practitioner who has always intended to improve his understanding of buman optics but never got around to it.
SURGERY OF THE OBLIQUE MUSCLES OF THE EYE by Walter H. Fink, M.D., Minneapolis, Minnesota. Illustrated the C. V. Mosby Company, St. Louis, 1951. 350 pp. $8.75. This is a very lucid well illustrated and practical treatise on the limited subject of surgical correction of the two most important of the six extrinsic muscles of the eye. The book is in two parts of which the first, comprising nearly half the book, deals with the anatomy of the oblique muscles, and the second, with the management of oblique muscle defects. Separate chapters deal respectively with the embryology, comparative anatomy, microscopic anatomy and developmental analysis of the oblique muscles taken together. The gross anatomy and clinical anatomy of the superior and inferior obliques are each considered in four separate chapters. There is a good historical account of surgery of the oblique muscles. Their physiology is described in detail and the frequency, etiology and diagnosis of oblique muscle defects is thoroughly set forth Surgical indications and techniques are fully explained.

-N M-A AUTHORS
LANDMAN, G. S. and F. D. HENDRICKS. S. R. TAGGART, and A. B. GREAVES: Treatment of Granuloma Inguinale with Intramuscular Chloramphenicol in

Ambulatory Patients. Amer. J. of Syph. Gon. and Ven. Dis., 36:515-518, 1952.
KELLY, V. C. and R. B. SCOTT: Incidence of Pinworm and Ascaris Infestation in Negro Children in the Washington Area. Medical Annals of the District of Columbia, 22:351-352, 1953.

ANNOUNCEMENTS
The 39thi annual CLINICAI. CONGRESS of tile AMERICAN COLLEGE OF SURGEON S Will )e lilel(l in Clhicago. Illinois, October 5 through 9, 1953. D)R. 1AUL R. HAWILEY of Chiicago is D)irector

of the College.

J. MELLER OPHTHALMIC SURGERY, Sixth Edition Revised and Enlarged by Professor Dr. J. Bock with a supplement by K. Kofler. Translated and Edited by Ray K. Daily, M.D., F.A.C.S. and Louis Daily, Jr., B.S., M.D., Ph.D. (Ophth.), F.A.C.S. The Blakiston Co., New York, 1953. xii+529 pp. $12.00. The sixth edition of the German classic by Dr. Meller, former professor of ophthalmology at the University of Vienna, is an extensive revision by Dr. J. Bock, head