POE, Leonard
Buy the book
Sponsor:
Institute of Historical Research
Publication:
Physicians and Irregular Medical Practitioners in London 1550-1640
Year
published: 2004
Supporting
documents:
Citation:
'POE, Leonard', Physicians and Irregular Medical Practitioners in London 1550-1640:
Database (2004). URL:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?compid=17720&strquery=leonard%20poe.
Date accessed: 08 October 2005.
|
Leonard
POE
Biography
Known London address
|
Christ Church
|
Parish
|
St
Katherine Cree (Christ
Church)
[incl Holy Trinity Aldgate, St Mary Magdalen Aldgate, St Michael Aldgate]
|
Ward
|
Aldgate
|
Date
|
1631
|
College
membership
Medical education (university)
|
Cambridge
|
Date of MD
|
1615
|
Date became Extra-Licentiate
|
13/06/1596
|
Date became Licentiate
|
11/12/1606
|
Date became Fellow
|
07/07/1609
|
Date of Fellowship
|
1609-1631
|
In trouble before membership
|
Yes
|
Other notes
|
Cre
MD Cantab 1615. Powerful patrons.
|
Date of death
|
4
Apr 1631
|
Censorial
hearings
|
5 Dec 1589
|
Entry
|
P
was summoned.
|
Attitude of the accused
|
absent
|
Action taken
|
Summoned.
|
|
19 Nov 1591
|
Entry
|
P
was forbidden to practise.
|
Action taken
|
Forbidden
to practise.
|
Verdict
|
guilty
|
Sentence
|
Forbidden
to practise
|
|
7 Dec 1592
|
Entry
|
Leonard
Poe appeared and he confessed that he had practised
medicine here in London
for four years. He was enjoined to show in the next Comitia the letter
obtained from and written on his behalf by the most worthy Councillors. This he faithfully promised to do.
|
Pressure applied by College
|
yes
|
Action taken
|
P
to reappear with his letter of authorization from the Councillors
|
|
22 Dec 1592
|
Entry
|
P
had not kept his promise to bring letters of support, but Dr Browne
brought letter of authority addressed to Coll & JPs, dated 28 Feb
1592, signed by Arch Cant, Lord Threw, Lord Admiral, Lord Chamberlain,
Lord Cobham,
Lord Buckhurst, Mr Wolley,
Ashley. Letter said P had been very successful as a physician and
guaranteed his abilities.
|
Pressure applied by College
|
yes
|
|
20 Jan 1593
|
Entry
|
The
Earl of Essex had written again on P's behalf, dated 29 Dec 1592. He
referred to his previous letters and was displeased that the College had
not licensed P as he (E) had asked. He said he would continue to support
and assist P. After discussion, College decided not to license P, but to
discuss his case again.
|
Attitude of the accused
|
asked
for College membership
|
Pressure applied by College
|
yes
|
Action taken
|
Licence
refused but case to be discussed again.
|
Verdict
|
guilty
|
Sentence
|
None.
College to discuss the case again.
|
|
22 April 1594
|
Entry
|
Letter
was discussed. P to be summoned.
|
Attitude of the accused
|
absent
|
Pressure applied by College
|
yes
|
Action taken
|
P
to be summoned.
|
|
24 April 1594
|
Entry
|
P
appeared. In deference to Essex
the College tried to find some merit in him and asked only trivial
questions, but he refused to be examined. He said he had cured one Craven
of a liver obstruction, but failed to answer questions on it. He could
not give the symptoms of pleurisy, and knew no Greek or Latin.
|
Attitude of the accused
|
defiant
|
Action taken
|
College
to report to Essex.
|
|
10 May 1594
|
Entry
|
Essex
had sent another letter (Goodall 86-7, Annals 104b-105a). He complained
of the continuing harrassment of P and insisted
that P did good. He noted the licence granted
to Banister and demanded a final answer (17 April 1594). College replied
(Goodall 87, Annals 105b) - they accepted Davies, but P they found so
ignorant that they cd find no grounds for licensing him, try as they
would.
|
Pressure applied by College
|
yes
|
Action taken
|
No
licence
granted.
|
Verdict
|
guilty
|
Sentence
|
None
|
|
23 Dec 1594
|
Entry
|
P
was summoned.
|
Attitude of the accused
|
absent
|
Action taken
|
Summoned.
|
|
10 Jan 1595
|
Entry
|
P
was asked to show his letters from the Queen's Council (Essex
had given him a letter from himself and two of the Councillors).
|
Pressure applied by College
|
yes
|
Action taken
|
P
to show his new letter(s) of support.
|
Verdict
|
case
not completed
|
|
22 Dec 1595
|
Entry
|
Essex
had sent ANOTHER letter on behalf of P. It was read, and Dr Giffard pleaded P's case, but the College was still
not convinced.
|
Pressure applied by College
|
yes
|
Action taken
|
No
licence
granted (still).
|
Verdict
|
case
not completed
|
|
18 Dec 1589
|
Entry
|
P
was examined and found completely unlearned and ignorant. But because of
the intervention of North and the Earl of Essex, he was excused fines for
previous practice, though forbidden to practice in future.
|
Attitude of the accused
|
asked
for College membership
|
Pressure applied by College
|
yes
|
Action taken
|
Excused
fine, but forbidden to practise
in future.
|
Verdict
|
guilty
|
Sentence
|
Forbidden
to practise.
Excused fine because of patrons.
|
|
13 July 1596
|
Entry
|
P
was to be licensed and allowed to practise
medicine, but only for the French pox, intermittent tertian fever, skin
diseases, the stone and gout. For all other fevers and diseases he was to
summon the aid of a FRCP. He was to pay £4 p.a.
|
Attitude of the accused
|
asked
for College membership
|
Action taken
|
LRCP
(restricted).
|
Verdict
|
guilty
|
Sentence
|
To
be licensed conditionally
|
|
22 Dec 1597
|
Entry
|
P
was summoned. Dr Smith accused him, on the evidence of a nobleman,
Fitzwilliam, of having given pills to a woman, who died the same day.
|
Initiator of the complaint
|
college
member
|
Second initiator of the complaint
|
person
unconnected with the patient or the case
|
Action taken
|
?
|
Verdict
|
case
not completed
|
Number of crimes
|
1
|
|
5 May 1598
|
Entry
|
P
was accused by Juliana Skulls, a 'poor little woman' who was illiterate,
of giving her husband a brown medicine on 19 April 1598, and another
medicine at 6 a.m. next day; the husband died at 10 a.m. and attributed
his death to his 'pretty supper'. P had said he would vomit 3-4 times and
have 3-4 stools. Actually he vomited 5-6 times & died vomiting. P
said it was Diasordium,
suitable for putrid fever. In the morning, P had felt S's pulse and said
that he had no sickness of the heart, only a great heat and cold.
|
Initiator of the complaint
|
spouse
of the patient
|
Action taken
|
?
|
Number of crimes
|
1
|
|
8 May 1598
|
Entry
|
P
was absent, ill with the quinsy.
|
Action taken
|
Failed
to appear.
|
Number of crimes
|
1
|
|
26 June 1598
|
Entry
|
Because
of P's practice he was to be fined 20 marks and imprisoned. The sentence
was to be announced on Friday, 'at the usual place and time'.
|
Action taken
|
To
be fined 20 marks and imprisoned.
|
Number of crimes
|
1
|
|
30 June 1598
|
Entry
|
P
appeared. The Censors gave their opinion about Skull's case: that the
vomits had killed him. P should now forfeit his licence and go to Wood Street
prison and remain there at their pleasure. P was not to be relicensed
until a majority of the College thought it fit. If he complied (i.e.
turned in his licence), his imprisonment wd be
remitted. Censors hinted that this was because of his patrons.
|
Action taken
|
Expelled
as LRCP and imprisoned. And fined 20 marks?
|
Verdict
|
guilty
|
Sentence
|
Imprisoned
in Wood
Street, expelled as LRCP,
?and fined 20 marks
|
Number of crimes
|
1
|
|
4 Aug 1598
|
Entry
|
P
did not appear and he had not given up his licence.
College concluded that he should be imprisoned.
|
Action taken
|
Failed
to appear. To be imprisoned.
|
|
24 Nov 1598
|
Entry
|
P
had obtained a letter of protection from the Queen's Councillors
warning that he was not to be arrested or imprisoned by anyone. He had
shown it to the keepers of each of the prisons, and none dared arrest
him. College had a considerable discussion on the case and decided to
write to the Council asking for permission to bring a common-law suit
against P. To be signed by Marbeck, Doylie & Paddy.
|
Pressure applied by College
|
yes
|
Action taken
|
College
wrote to Queen's Council asking permission to take P to law
|
|
30 Nov 1598
|
Entry
|
Coll
wrote long letter (Goodall 117-8), pointing out the legal position and
asking to be allowed to use 'the ordinary course of law' against P,
otherwise others would follow him and endanger the lives of EI's
subjects. Various FRCPs to approach Lord Buckhurst, Essex, Lord Admiral,
Archbishop of Canterbury, Secretary (Lord Cecil) & Lord Fortescue.
Queen's Council replied, case to go to arbitration, 7-man panel (Lord
Herbert, Master of Requests; Francis Bacon; SMITH, BROWNE, JAMES, Royal
Physicians and FRCPs; Thomas Smith & William Wade, Clerks of
Council).
|
Action taken
|
Letter
written and sent. Council replied by setting up tribunal.
|
|
11 Jan 1599
|
Entry
|
Commissioners
reported that P should confess and acknowledge that he had offended the
College by transgressing their licence,
that their censure was just, acknowledge his fault & accept fine of 5
marks & give bond of £100 for good behaviour
in future. He shd relinquish his licence until he did submit, when it would be
returned.
|
Action taken
|
Arbitrators
decided P should submit - fine 5 marks, bond £100.
|
|
18 May 1590
|
Entry
|
P,
deacon of Lincoln,
sought a licence to practise
in the French disease, fevers and rheumatism. He was examined, found to
be ignorant and refused a licence. However,
because of the representations of 'certain persons', his previous
misdeeds were to be overlooked, but he was forbidden to practise in any part of medicine in the future.
|
Attitude of the accused
|
asked
for College membership
|
Pressure applied by College
|
yes
|
Action taken
|
Examined
and rejected. Not fined, but forbidden to practise.
|
Verdict
|
guilty
|
Sentence
|
Forbidden
to practise.
Excused fine because of patrons.
|
|
16 Jan 1599
|
Entry
|
P
appeared and followed the conditions precisely, paying into Dr Gilbert's
hand the 5 marks fine. He delivered up his licence,
which was to be given back at the next meeting (see next).
|
Action taken
|
P
submitted to the College and paid 5 marks fine.
|
|
22 Jan 1599
|
Entry
|
P's
licence
was redelivered to him.
|
Action taken
|
LRCP
again.
|
|
3 Feb 1599
|
Entry
|
One
Higginson complained that P had given H's wife a potion on Thursday, a
purgative on Friday and a fumigant on Sunday; she had died on the
following Thursday from excessive purging.
|
Initiator of the complaint
|
spouse
of the patient
|
Action taken
|
?
|
Verdict
|
case
not completed
|
Number of crimes
|
1
|
|
5 July 1600
|
Entry
|
Dr
Bright complained about P's treatment of one Palmer.
|
Initiator of the complaint
|
college
member
|
Action taken
|
P
ordered to appear.
|
Verdict
|
case
not completed
|
Number of crimes
|
1
|
|
25 June 1601
|
Entry
|
P
was summoned and blamed for the death of a nobleman, Allen. The President
and Censor examined him on the case. He said A had acute abdominal pains
and vomiting for 2 days, but no fever. He had administered a clyster and
had then suspected an imperfect pleurisy & had let blood by a surgeon
A had sent for. Eventually P confessed he had not known what the disease
was.
|
Attitude of the accused
|
confessed
|
Action taken
|
Fined
£13.
|
Verdict
|
guilty
|
Sentence
|
Fined
£13
|
Number of crimes
|
1
|
|
22 Dec 1604
|
Entry
|
P
was charged with practice in 'chlorosis or cacochymy'.
He claimed they were skin diseases, for which he was licensed. He was
warned not to use that pretext in future and that the College, not he, wd
fix the limits of his licence.
|
Action taken
|
Warned
?and dismissed.
|
Verdict
|
guilty
|
Sentence
|
Warned
to keep within terms of licence
|
|
30 Jan 1606
|
Entry
|
P
asked for a general licence
to extend the restricted one he already had. Rejected by a majority.
|
Attitude of the accused
|
asked
for College membership
|
Action taken
|
Licence
not extended to cover all diseases.
|
|
11 Dec 1606
|
Entry
|
The
Earls of Suffolk,
Northampton and Salisbury sent a letter requesting a
general licence for P. A majority of FRCPs this
time allowed it, though the existing licence
was extended rather than any new papers sealed.
|
Attitude of the accused
|
asked
for College membership
|
Pressure applied by College
|
yes
|
Action taken
|
Licence
extended to general permission.
|
|
22 Dec 1606
|
Entry
|
A
copy was made of P's licence,
which WAS in fact a new document, i.e. letters patent.
|
Attitude of the accused
|
asked
for College membership
|
Action taken
|
P's
new Licence
was copied.
|
|
30 June 1590
|
Entry
|
The
Earl of Essex had sent a letter on P's behalf, dated 20 May 1590. P was
one of E's physicians, molested by the College for practising
on his [whose?] friends. E was confident of P's abilities and there were
numerous testimonies to it, e.g. MUFFETT (E's physician). E asked the
College not to trouble P but to tolerate him. Coll replied, E was
mistaken, P was dangerous, M had changed his mind.
|
Attitude of the accused
|
absent
|
Pressure applied by College
|
yes
|
Action taken
|
College
refused to tolerate P.
|
|
22 Dec 1590
|
Entry
|
The
Earl of Essex wrote again about P.
|
Pressure applied by College
|
yes
|
Action taken
|
No
decision.
|
|
8 Jan 1591
|
Entry
|
P
appeared.
|
Attitude of the accused
|
asked
for College membership
|
Action taken
|
No
decision.
|
|
5 Feb 1591
|
Entry
|
Poe
[among others] was to be asked to appear at the next Comitia.
|
Attitude of the accused
|
absent
|
Action taken
|
To
be summoned to the next Comitia.
|
|
5 March 1591
|
Entry
|
P
was examined. He confessed to practising
for 2 years and claimed to have cured many epileptics. Asked what
epilepsy was, he said it was 'water gathered about the cells of the
heart'. He gave an account of his cures for gonorrhea, melancholy and
epilepsy. He was currently treating Ward, leatherseller,
for fever, and Pemberton for red face. He habitually treated members of Essex's household.
|
Attitude of the accused
|
confessed
|
Action taken
|
To
be fined £20.
|
Verdict
|
guilty
|
Sentence
|
To
be fined £20
|
Number of crimes
|
2
|
|
5 Nov 1591
|
Entry
|
P
was summoned.
|
Attitude of the accused
|
absent
|
Action taken
|
Summoned.
|
|
|
|
9 Jan 1607
EntryS was accused by Dr Poe and
Dr Compton of selling medicines without a prescription, or on prescription to
other apothecaries. S said that the charge proceeded from C's hatred of him,
and said that C himself should be condemned.
Initiator of the complaintcollege
member
Second initiator of the complaintother
medical practitioner
Action takenNo decision reached. S
ordered to take care with his prescriptions
Verdictnot proven
4 Sep 1607
EntryJohn Wilbrow
accused S, an apothecary of Newgate Market, of
intercepting a prescription sent by Poe to Compton,
'falsely claiming the name of Compton'.
S appeared and defended his servant DICKMAN (225, qv) from another charge,
using 'ridiculous' excuses.
Initiator of the complaintperson
unconnected with the patient or the case
Attitude of the accusedmade an
excuse
Action takenTo reappear with
DICKMAN at next meeting.
From: 'SMITH, John', Physicians and Irregular Medical Practitioners
in London 1550-1640: Database (2004). URL:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?compid=17811&strquery=poe. Date
accessed: 08 October 2005.
From: 'SMITH, John', Physicians and Irregular Medical
Practitioners in London 1550-1640: Database (2004). URL:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?compid=17811&strquery=poe. Date
accessed: 08 October 2005.
Censorial hearings
16 Oct 1612
EntryVicount Lisle had written a
letter 'through Mr Harvey' complaining of T, a Fellow
of Merton College, Oxford, for treating L's niece, the Countess of Rutland, on
31 July. She had died; Giffard, Fox and Poe had
attended her after T. The matter was postponed until G, F and P had been heard.
Initiator of the complaintrelative
of the patient
Action takenDeferred until Giffard, Fox and Poe should be present.
Number of crimes1
6 Nov 1612
EntryFox, Giffard
and Poe were to write an answer to Lisle.
Action takenCollege to reply to Lisle ?exonerating T?.
Number of crimes1
From: 'TALBOTT, ?John', Physicians
and Irregular Medical Practitioners in London 1550-1640: Database (2004). URL:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?compid=17849&strquery=poe. Date
accessed: 08 October 2005.
4 Feb 1614
EntryThe President (MOUNDEFORD)
reported that according to the information of Dr Poe, Dr Tenant had illicitly treated a certain royal servant
suffering from purple fever (peticulari febre), and that most recently. He wanted this to be noted
here in the Annals.
Action taken?T's
illict practice noted in the Annals
Verdictcase not completed
Number of crimes1
From: 'TENANT, Thomas', Physicians and Irregular Medical
Practitioners in London 1550-1640: Database (2004). URL:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?compid=17854&strquery=poe. Date
accessed: 08 October 2005.
Die Mercurii, Octobris
22 1645.
Prayers.
ACcording to Order, the Grand
Committee of the whole House sat, to take into Consideration the Matter of
Religion, and of the University
of Cambridge.
Mr. Whittacre in the Chair.
Mr. Speaker resumed the Chair.
Upon Mr. Whittacre's Report;
From: 'House of Commons Journal Volume 4: 22 October 1645',
Journal of the House of Commons: volume 4: 1644-1646 (1802), pp. 317-18. URL:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?compid=23525&strquery=poe. Date
accessed: 08 October 2005.
A Message from the Lords, by Sir Edward Leech and Mr. Page;
The Lords have commanded us to deliver you this Paper: It
came from the Scotts Commissioners; and was reported from the Committee of both
Kingdoms: They desire you would take it into speedy Consideration:- This
Ordinance, for the Pay of the Waggoners: It moved
first from this House; and the Lords do agree to it, with these short
Amendments. They desire to put you in mind of several Petitions, formerly sent
to you, of the Lord Blanye's, of Captain Hutchins', Captain Poe's, and Captain Canon's
From: 'House of Commons Journal Volume 4: 22 October 1645',
Journal of the House of Commons: volume 4: 1644-1646 (1802), pp. 317-18. URL:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?compid=23525&strquery=poe. Date
accessed: 08 October 2005.
Censorial hearings
28 May 1632
EntryLord Holland had written asking the College to
investigate the case of Mr Lane, for which M's
servant Cromwell had been sentenced. M, apothecary, said that Lane had not been
sick, but had wanted to take a medicine he'd previously had from Dr Poe (4 pulveris sancti Zis syrupi Augustani
XIi uno albi
XI iiis misce fiat potio). It purged & L asked for more, so M gave a
cordial. Dr Giffard called & found L seriously
ill, gave a clyster of milk & bolus with laudani Paracelsi gr. i¼, and
then diacodium & plantain. C bought sublimate for
engraving knives and added it!
Action takenFull investigation. Conclusion: poisoning by mercury
sublimate.
From: 'MATHEWS,
Christopher', Physicians and Irregular Medical Practitioners in London
1550-1640: Database (2004). URL:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?compid=17646&strquery=poe. Date
accessed: 08 October 2005.
House of Commons
Journal Volume 8
11 July 1661
Ordered, That the
Petition of William Poe Esquire, complaining of the great Prejudice he received
by a supposed Protection, which one William Harrison (who lives and hath his
Family in Essex) pretends to have, as a menial Servant to Sir William Fenwick,
one of the Knights of the County of Northumberland, (who, by Leave of this
House, is gone into the Country) be referred to the Committee of Privileges and
Elections; to be read, and taken into Consideration this Afternoon.
From: 'House of
Commons Journal Volume 8: 11 July 1661', Journal of the House of Commons:
volume 8: 1660-1667 (1802), pp. 297-99. URL:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?compid=26385&strquery=poe. Date
accessed: 08 October 2005.