Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
Introduction Anthony Daffy's Elixir Account Book offers a unique insight into the medical economy of the later seventeenth century. It records sales beyond London in the 1670s and 1680s of Daffy's "Elixir Salutis", or simply Daffy's Elixir as it was better known, a medicine that continued to be manufactured and widely used into the twen- tieth century in England, America and various European countries.' Daffy's Elixir was one of the most famous, as well one of as the most long-lasting, of proprietary medicines, that amorphous group of remedies distinguished from the rest of the phar- macopoeia by the secrecy with which their producers shrouded their ingredients. Secret remedies had long been a part of medicine in Europe, and had circulated internationally since the sixteenth century at least.2 in the and scale of However, England variety production of proprietary medicines seems to have dramatically expanded in the later seventeenth century, although this is largely inferred from the survival of advertisements and pamphlets. The increasing prominence of proprietary medicines was one of the most distinctive, controversial and striking developments in medicine of the period. They are well known to historians from the mass of colourful, argumentative and immodest pamphlets and advertisements that their producers issued-and from the extensive condemnations that they later attracted from orthodox medical practitioners, in particularly the nineteenth century when the Lancet launched all out war on quack medicines. Much less is known of the economics of the trade than of the advertising strategies, rhetoric and the ethics of proprietary medicine producers, which have inevitably attracted much comment.3 For the later period we have some sense of the massive scale of the proprietary medicine industry from tax records. However, we have previously had nothing Advertisements for American sales are noted in David L The New Pharmaceutical l Cowen, Jersey Association, 1870-1970, Trenton, NJ, New Jersey Pharmaceutical Association, 1970, 117-18; J H pp. Young and George B Griffenhagen, 'Old English patent medicines in America', Chemist and Druggist, 29 June 1957, Annual Special Issue, pp. James The toadstool millionaires: a social 714-22; Harvey Young, history ofpatent medicines in America before federal regulation, Princeton University Press, 1961, pp. 9. 7, A German recipe for "Daffys Blutreinigendes Elixir" (roughly translatable as "Daffy's Bloodcleansing Elixir") was included in E Hahn and J Holfert, Spezialitaten und Geheimmittel: Ihre und Herkunft 6th We A Zusammensetzung, edn, Berlin, Springer, 1906. are grateful to Helmstaedter for this information, and to Ulf Schmidt for the translation. 2The fullest discussion to date is of the "Orvietan": David Gentilcore, Healers and healing in early modern Manchester 1998. to London are discussed in Patrick Italy, University Press, Imports briefly Wallis, 'Medicines for London: the and of London DPhil trade, regulation lifecycle apothecaries, c.1610-c.1670', of thesis, University Oxford, 2002, pp. 210-13. is now a substantial of work on medicines and the "medical The best 3There body proprietary fringe". remains Health sale: in Manchester study Roy Porter, for quackery England, 1660-1850, University Press, 1989. See also W F and R Porter and medical Bynum (eds), Medicalfringe orthodoxy, 1750-1850, London, Croom Renate Pious traders in medicine: a German network in Helm, 1987; Wilson, pharmaceutical North State 2000. One of eighteenth-century America, University Park, PA, Pennsylvania University Press, the few to consider the commercial of the trade is John 'Product innovation in implications Styles, early modem London', Past and Present, 2000, 168: 124-69. 1 Introduction than speculation about the question of how widely proprietary medicines were more promoted, distributed and retailed in the seventeenth century. This lacuna has been unfortunate because proprietary medicines form part of the interesting particularly group of luxury or semi-luxury products that were seemingly all being consumed in ever greater quantities at the close of the seventeenth century. The part played by medical as has often been observed, a products and services in this development was significant: such as tea, chocolate, coffee and tobacco, were number of the most popular new products, in before their other attractions were popularized.4 But with originally medicinal purpose, a few other medicine's part in the growth of consumption is still these and exceptions, The business history of a proprietary medicine such as Daffy's Elixir largely uncharted. of the by which merchants and manufacturers inspired and provides new evidence process met the new demands that arose as the consumption patterns of English society changed. It an unusual source on the activities of one of the many traders involved in also provides the internal and external trade of England, revealing the large scale and extensive inter- survival of this single national reach that it was possible for them to attain.5 The fortunate in the 1670s and early 1680s Account Book recording the Elixir's sales beyond London therefore provides us with a window, albeit a narrow and at times somewhat opaque one, manufacturing that has wholly eluded historians into an aspect of trade, commerce and now. before that Anthony Daffy's Account Book provides a source of interest It is in the conviction trade that this edition has been produced. The very story to the history of both medicine and of the Account Book among the Chancery Master's Exhibits in the behind the survival at as we will see, illustrates some of the commercial practices, and National Archives Kew, of those involved in the proprietary medicine trade.6 There it forms part of one ambitions, of the boxes of business and personal records left unclaimed after submission as many evidence in the notoriously slow and inconclusive equity cases which the Court of Chancery oversaw. Daffy's Account Book was put in the hands of the Court during an Elixir. This ensued between interminable legal saga over who had the right to produce the soon after his death, intestate, his two surviving daughters, his wife, and her new husband, of his death further, we should first in 1684. However, before we explore the aftermath examine the life of Anthony Daffy. in and Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1990; 4Carole Shammas, The pre-industrial consumer England America, and Porter and the world of goods, London, Routledge, 1993; John John Brewer Roy (eds), Consumption The the English culture in the eighteenth century, London, HarperCollins, Brewer, pleasures of imagination: Jones and Rebecca Spang, 'Sans-culottes, sans sans tabac: shifting realms of necessity 1997; Colin cafe, and in France', in Maxine Berg and Helen Clifford (eds), Consumers and luxury: luxury eighteenth-century consumer culture in 1650-1850, Manchester University Press, 1999, pp. 37-62. Europe, in the sixteenth and 5See Thomas S The inland trade: studies in English internal trade Willan, seventeenth centuries, Manchester University Press, 1976. three other manuscript books which 6National Archives (hereafter NA), C 114/59. The box contains is uncertain if this was shop. relate to an or druggist's business, although it Anthony Daffy's apothecary's notice the because the first 7 folios are out The identity of the account book escaped by original cataloguer Book the 1 1677' is on what is now fol. 8. The of place, and the title 'Anthony Daffy his Dept January x in consists of bound in a marbled paper cover. account book is roughly 40cm 20cm size, and paper pages all which are used. the but appears not to have It contains 154 folios, not of Grassby recognized author, book at Richard The business community of seventeenth-century considered the any length: Grassby, England, Cambridge University Press, 1995, p. 2 Introduction Anthony Daffy Anthony Daffy was born some time in the mid-1620s, probably in London, where his father, also called Anthony, was working as a coachman in 1637. At that time, the family lived in the sprawling parish of St Martin's in the Fields, Middlesex, on the western edge of the city near Westminster, where work for Anthony senior would have been most abundant. Daffy appears to have had at least one sister, Elizabeth, born in 1632 in St Martin's, to Anthony senior and his then wife Ann.7 Nothing is known of Anthony Daffy's early life until the summer of 1637, when he was bound apprentice for nine years to Edward Seabrooke, member a of the Cordwainers' Company, the London guild of shoemakers.8 Nine years was a relatively long term-most Cordwainers' apprentices served seven or eight years, and this suggests that Daffy was probably young, perhaps around fifteen, and poor, as we would also expect from his father's occupation. Daffy completed his term, something only around half of apprentices managed, and was made a freeman of the Company, and a citizen of London, in 1647-8, paying the standard fee to the Cordwainers of a white spoon and 7d, along with administrative fees of 3s 4d. By his own account, Daffy worked at first as a shoemaker, and it is unclear how and when the Elixir business became his main concern. The Elixir was not, as he admitted, his own invention, although he did claim to have much improved and amended the original recipe.9 In fact, like a number of other proprietary medicines, the Elixir was not the creation of a medical practitioner at all.'0 Instead, it was apparently invented by a clergyman, Thomas Daffy (1616/17-1680), who may have produced his cure to make an income after being ejected from his living in Harby, Leicestershire, by Parliamentary visitors in 1648."1 That a clergyman should have invented a proprietary medicine should not be seen as unusual. The early modern cleric was frequently expected to take as much care for his parishioners' health as he was for their souls. Although we do not know the exact details of the relationship, Anthony Daffy was a kinsman of Thomas.'2 Both Thomas and his son, the Nottingham apothecary Daniel Daffy (1649-c. 1679), appear in Anthony's Account Book, the latter described as his "Cousen danyell" and the recipient of numerous boxes of 7Intemational Genealogical Index (hereafter IGI), 24 Nov. 1632. The occupation of senior Anthony is given in Anthony junior's apprenticeship minute, see note 8. With no record of Anthony junior's birth, it is possible that Ann and his father may have married subsequently. It is plausible that Anthony was related to the Elizabeth Daffe, aged twenty, then of Stepney, Middlesex, who received a licence to the marry surgeon Humphrey Dyke, of Stepney, Middlesex, on 21 Aug. 1662. At this time her unnamed father was still alive, however the discrepancy in age between Anthony's sister and this woman makes it unlikely they were the same person: George J Armytage (ed.), Allegations for licences issued by the Vicar-General of the marriage Archbishop of Canterbury, 1660 to 1668, Harleian Society, London, 1892, vol. 33, p. 41. 8Guildhall Library, London (hereafter GL), MS 7351/2. Seabrooke may have been married to a relation of Anthony, having wed an "Alice Dafree" in 1633: GL, MS 4093/1. 9Anthony Daffy, Daffy's original Elixir Salutis, vindicated against all counterfeits, [1675?], pp. 2-3. "'Other examples include "Kent's Powder", the creation of Elizabeth Kent: Grey, Duchess of Charles Webster, The great instauration: science, medicine and reform, 1626-1660, London, Duckworth, 1975, p. 255. 11 The Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford University Press, 2004 (hereafter ODNB), vol. 14, pp. 892-3; Joseph Foster, Alumni Oxonienses, 8 vols, Oxford University Press, 1888-1891, vol. 1, p. 366. It should be noted that the only source for the Elixir being Thomas is his Daffy's invention daughter Katharine's own advertisements for her Elixir. Anthony Daffy did admit the recipe was not originally of his own making, but never identified the inventor. ODNB, vol. 1, p. 3 Introduction lances and which apothecary's necessaries-jars, glasses, boxes, pipkins, drugs Anthony on his he was a rival of the Elixir bought account-although apparently producer [1 13A].13 We do not know when the for the medicine was first to original recipe passed Anthony Daffy. His own few comments only cloud the question. He seems, if anything, to have sought to distance the Elixir from Thomas Daffy. One of the very few testimonials to be removed from the pamphlet he issued advertising the medicine was that recording the cure from the stone and gravel of "Mrs. Katherine, the Wife of Mr. Tho. Daffey of Redmill in in the County of Leicester"; similarly, it is hard to credit Anthony's claim 1675 that he had well have been an as it been preparing the Elixir for twenty years, but this may exaggeration 14 were the Elixir was formed part of his sales pitch. Although Thomas and Anthony related, or in for a debt. The possibly transferred under some form of contract part payment sums and further loans Account Book contains notes of various repaid by Thomas, him with Thomas and his does from Anthony to [96A]. Anthony's relationship family not seem to have been particularly close. Although he had relied on Anthony's assistance in London, when Thomas's son Daniel died in 1679 he did not consider Anthony close to leave him a those for his brother and sister.15 It should enough bequest, reserving father, be noted that Anthony Daffy's was not a unique transition. One of the most famous medical practitioners of the first half of the seventeenth century, William Trigg, had also started his career as a shoemaker.'6 Trigg's secret remedies were, appropriately enough, also sold as proprietary medicines in the later seventeenth century.'7 in in the of By 1654 Daffy had settled the parish of St Antholin's, City London, of the and achieved sufficient respectability to become one of the members parish built in the vestry.18 That year he moved into one of the new shops that had been of on Row a the churchyard St Antholin's Budge only year earlier, paying relatively low annual rent of £2.19 this he is to have but almost By point likely married, nothing her existence is known of first with whom he had his eldest beyond Daffy's wife, son, Elias, and possibly a daughter, Dorcas, who died in the 1680s, soon after Anthony's own death.20 Late in 1660 his first wife and was buried in the of St died, churchyard Antholin's, near to her husband's shop.2' did not mourn her for and on 1 January Daffy long, 1660/1 he married Ellen Harwood, daughter of Moses and Jane Harwood, in his parish 13Daniel's sister Katharine later wrote that: own Mr. Daniel in "My brother, Daffy, formerly Apothecary life": Katharine Nottingham made this Elixir from the same receipt, and sold it there during his Daffy, Daffy's famous Elixir Salutis [London?, 1707?]. Broadsheet in British Library (hereafter BL), Harley MSS The the on the of the sheet in the volume. 5931(226). date is conjectured by cataloguer position Elixir the choise drink T '4Anthony Daffy, Salutis: of health, London, Milbourn, 1673, p. 4; Anthony Elixir Salutis: the choice drink W 2. Daffy, of health, London, G, 1675, p. Record sub. Proved 29 March 1680. 15Nottingham Office, PPNW, 'Daffy'. Medical in modern London: and 16Margaret Pelling, conflicts early patronage, physicians, irregular practitioners 1550-1640, Oxford University Press, 2003, pp. 149-50. Dr. arcana's & R D for 17Eugenius Philanthropos, Trigg's secrets, panacea's, London, Dixy Page, 1665, Richard Consilium seasonable ... sig. *2v; Barker, anti-pestilentiale: or, advice, concerning medicines, both the and cure this B4r. for preservation from, of, present plague, London, 1665, sig. MS fol. 27. 18GL, 494/1, MS fols. 242v. '9GL, 1046/1, 221v, 224v, 226v, 230v, 233v, 236v, 239v, 20There is some possibility his first wife's surname was Halford, given Daffy's relationship with two men named John Halford, one of whom he describes as his "brother in law" [95A] and the other as his"sonn" or "sonn in law" [1 17A, 162A]. More likely, Dorcas or another unnamed daughter married Halford. 21GL, MS 1046/1, fol. 243v. 4 Introduction church.22 They had at least five children: Joseph in 1662, Thomas in 1666/7, Mary in 1672, Daniel in 1676, and Martha in 1677.23 Of Daffy's seven children, only Elias, Mary and Martha are known to have survived him to adulthood. The workings of parish life in the small central parishes of seventeenth-century London demanded the involvement, as well as the tax payments, of those with the moderate levels of wealth and stability that Daffy already possessed in the 1650s. Some of the many parish offices could be escaped on payment of a fine: Daffy, for example, avoided taking on the burdensome job of constable in 1661 by this route, paying the considerable sum of £5 for the privilege. Not all offices could be so easily avoided, however, and in April of the plague year of 1665 Daffy was chosen to be one of the parish churchwardens and collectors for the poor, a very responsible, and possibly dangerous, job at such a time. Daffy's term as churchwarden ended in chaos, however. Whether through some matter related to the epidemic, the fire of the next year-both of which placed heavy demands on church- wardens-or some other issue entirely, his relationship with his parish broke down refused to his the church- catastrophically. Daffy seems to have pass on to successors wardens' account book and the "poor's book", in which money for the poor was listed. Indeed, he apparently kept for himself various amounts of parish money, including an annuity that had been set up to pay for morning lectures in the parish. Eventually, the parish was pushed to prosecute him before the committee of Charitable Uses, and had him arrested. It was not until 1674/5 that they received the books and £70 of parish revenue from him, under an agreement secured by arbitrators.24 Well before the end of this dispute, Daffy had prudently moved away from his old parish. In 1673, when we first find him advertising his Elixir, he was living in Cock Court, off Fleet in Lane, but by the next year he had moved to a substantial house Prujean's Court, by the Ship Tavern, in the Old Bailey. Standing just outside the old city walls near to Ludgate Hill, Prujean's Court was in the parish of St Martin almost no Ludgate. There, Daffy played part in his new parish's life beyond the fines to avoid local offices. in paying requisite Only 1684 did he even the the few mentions of him in the join local vestry.25 However, parish records suggest that by the time he moved there he had successfully completed his transformation from shoemaker to "Doctor that it was not on Daffy", indicating only the of his Elixir that he himself "student in medicine". title-pages pamphlets styled While Daffy had been establishing his identity as a doctor and medical entrepreneur, he had maintained his involvement in the Cordwainers' Company. Daffy rose steadily through its ranks. He was a liveryman by 1664, and served as one of the wardens in 1668. In August 1675 he made the big step to becoming an assistant, a member of the Company's ruling court. With came additional duties as in and and even- greater status warden 1678 1680, the a could offer its the which he held tually greatest prize company members, mastership, in 1682-3. as master of the of During Daffy's year Company nothing great significance the events of in his He was occurred, perhaps fortunately considering 1665/6 parish. engaged in the usual slow round of new with freemen in approving liverymen, dealing debt to the and other mundane such as a cook to the company, matters, appointing company 22 IGI; NA, C 10/107/48. IGI. MS fols. MS fols. 121-125. 24GL, 1046/1, 266r-266v, 494/1, fol. 203. 25GL, MS1311/1, 5 Introduction the Lord Mayor's officer whom the company had employed to summon and dismissing members. The only event of note that year was the protest he led to the refractory Commissioners of Customs against a licence to export leather abroad sought by a group of projectors. Anthony Daffy died intestate on 2 February 1684/5.27 From the poor inheritance of a coachman's son, he had amassed a comfortable estate which extended even to a coach and chariot of his own. As Elias Ashmole commented when he noted down a copy of Daffy's p[ro]fitt".28 The focus of his recipe: it was a medicine "w[i]th w[hi]ch hee gained much in Court. This was a narrow and tall four-storey life was his comfortable house Prujean's building with front and back rooms on every floor of the kind common in the city. As the the only place that Daffy's business posthumous inventory of his possessions shows, intruded was the cellar, where a still and a surprisingly small quantity of Elixir, obviously In the rooms upstairs the family had a wealth of expensive valued at only £50, were kept. and the small luxuries-clocks, looking glasses, imported rugs, silk curtains, furniture hangings and prints-that were becoming the mark of urban civility. small statuettes, wall They were also well supplied with plate, worth £82, and had £100 in cash, underlining the wealth of the household. As well as his London house, Daffy had invested in a country house and farm, Thundersley Lodge in Essex, where he kept various horses and cows, in London and worth £257-notably more than his stock of Elixir. His domestic goods Thundersley were together worth £227.29 not all of which were The gross value of Daffy's estate, including debts due to him, others, as we will see. This put Daffy received, was £1,923, and much of this was owed to into Richard Grassby's among the lower echelons of London's business community, fitting £500 and £5,000 along with around bottom bracket of individuals with estates between Peter Earle's study of London orphans' inventories 7,300 other Londoners. Similarly, that members of the city's middling sort possessed an average of £5,283 in found assets. This is somewhat distorted by the wealth of major merchants, but gross figure similar trades to Daffy had on average somewhat larger estates: manu- people pursuing facturers and apothecaries £2,012. However, estimating wealth from averaged £3,773 makes it inventories is notoriously fraught. The omission of freehold real property parti- difficult, and the personalty represented only a portion of the estate. In Daffy's case, cularly to have been the house and land he settled on his eldest son Elias, seem reasonably to the were relatively substantial. By contrast, Daffy's gross assets according inventory the value of the Elixir in his possession, seem moderate, and some of the figures, such as his success is in the education he had given somewhat suspect. Another measure of apparent claims to medical skill had no foundation in formal to Elias. Where Anthony Daffy's Elias had been educated in Hertford and Saumur, before studying training, London, at his MB in 1687. It is ironic that Elias entered Caius College, medicine Cambridge, taking 26 GL, MS 7354/2. fol. 93v. 27NA, C 33/273, 28Bodleian Ashmole MS 1463, fol. 23. Library, Oxford, of London Record different inventories of Daffy's possessions are in: C 9/124/53; Corporation 29Slightly Book records cows for Office inventories, 2025. The Account Daffy buying (hereafter CLRO), Orphans' Thundersley [7B]. 6 Introduction one of the members of the of and established by John Caius, leading College Physicians tenacious of such as his father.30 opponent empirics must have come for him to have left his affairs without the Daffy's death suddenly ordering of a will. His burial was a costly and showy affair suitable to the position of a reasonably successful businessman and prominent citizen, which taxed his estate at £135 8s 2d. Thereafter, the fortunes of his estate became less happy. By law, because Daffy had his estate fell under the of died intestate with underage children, Mary and Martha, purview for that children the Orphans' Court of London, who were responsible ensuring orphan When his Ellen exhibited her accounts as received their due portion. widow, Daffy, that there was little left for the children. executor to the Court, however, it seemed his income and his total estate in Although his possessions speak of solid was, theory, of his as did for all businessmen. worth £1,923, debts formed a major part estate, they By £583 had been received from while £622 was the time the inventory was made, debtors, himself owed which exceeded still outstanding. Against this, Daffy £1,101, substantially the £935 his executor Ellen had in her hands after for his funeral and other paying expenses. As the Court noted: "nothing as yet remayneth for them Orphans till the debts are received". Fortunately for Ellen, they noted that "the widow is provided for already by other settlements".31 for a tortuous chain Anthony Daffy's intestate and indebted death was the starting point who had the to make the of legal and personal events that all turned on the question of right the of the Elixir Elixir. He had, his wife and children later claimed, intended to pass recipe and to them with an income. His on to his two young daughters, Mary Martha, provide at Such schemes are a estate was left to his son Elias, then still Cambridge. dynastic of medicines: Patrick Anderson left his Scots common feature of the histories proprietary Pill his while the childless Lionel left his to his John to daughters, Lockyer pill nephew, medicines in to have been viable businesses Watts.32 Proprietary seem, fact, particularly for their traditional role in healthcare with a kind of trade that be women, combining might eldest was run at a distance.33 In this because and Martha were still case, Mary young (the had entrusted his wife Ellen with the for the only twelve), Daffy reportedly recipe Elixir, were old to use it making her promise to pass it on to his daughters when they enough have more than them for the themselves. This arrangement would, clearly, compensated few months-if it had lack of a direct inheritance. it was after a However, disrupted only Trubshaw in ever existed in the first Ellen married Charles properly place-when July from who had been 1685. Trubshaw was a young man of twenty-three Birmingham, and in 1683 had entered not far educated at Trinity College, Cambridge, Gray's Inn, note 6 245-9. on London wealth from Peter The 30Grassby, op. cit., above, pp. Figures Earle, making of the middle class: in English business, society andfamily life London, 1660-1730, London, Methuen, 1989, John Alumni . . . Part From 1752 to 2 in 10 p. 121; Venn, Cantabrigienses, II, 1900, pts vols, Cambridge Pt vol. 2. University Press, 1922-1954, 1, 2, p. Common Book fol. 239. Serjeants 4, CLRO, to his William A 32National of MS 'Dr Certificate Library Scotland, 6295, Anderson, Relating Pills'; Pharmaceutical 'Grana Patrick Anderson and the true Scots Jackson, angelica: pills', Historian, 1987, his in the 17 on J K Crellin and J R 'Lionel and (4): pp. 2-5, p. 2; Scott, Lockyer pills', Proceedings of Wellcome XXIII international congress of the history of medicine, London, 2-9 September 1972, London, Institute of the History of Medicine, 1974, pp. 1182-6, p. lives in New 33See Amanda The women's Vickery, gentleman's daughter: Georgian England, Haven, 154-5. CT, Yale University Press, 1998, pp. 7 Introduction from the Daffy family home.34 Once married, Trubshaw quickly asserted his authority over his new wife's estate, seizing and searching Ellen's accounts and papers. There he found Claiming it as his conjugal right, he various documents, including the recipe for the Elixir. began to make and keep the profits from sales of the Elixir for himself. He also appro- diamond rings, plate, money, and bonds worth £500 each priated various pearl necklaces, from Elixir profits, again apparently on Anthony's (these had been raised posthumously daughters claimed as part of their inheritance. Trubshaw refused to instructions) which the of these goods, or make any allowance for the education and maintenance give any account of Daffy's two daughters. In this effort to retain Mary and Martha's inheritance, he was one John Wyne and apparently by Elias Daffy, their brother, although Elias's assisted by role was unclear, as will be seen. This account of events comes from Mary and Martha's complaint against Charles Trubshaw and Ellen, in a suit they instituted in the Court of Chancery in 1688, only three years after their father's death.35 From this, it is clear that Ellen and Charles's a defendant because of her marriage, marriage had soured rapidly. Although technically after the Court had overruled Charles's Ellen's response to their charges-only given Indeed, she claimed that: objection to her giving evidence-admitted everything.36 Deft would not teach him [Charles] the Art of makeing the aforesaid Elixir ye because the [Ellen] Trubshaw turned her and her children out of .doores his house & hath ever since sd Charles & will not allow ym a fitting allowance for their support.37 separated himselfe With the in Trubshaw's Ellen's resistance to revealing the method was futile. recipe hands, her from her home and possessions, Trubshaw next obtained a warrant to Having ejected seize the bonds and plate from her. in He dismissed her Trubshaw simply denied most of Ellen's claims his response. in that it was not a "thing assertion that the Elixir had been given to her trust, arguing her new husband, and the suit was transferable in Law". The profits were the property of malice of Ellen".38 As for the rest of the "instigated and promoted by the prejudice and and offered to transfer it, along with Mary and property, he admitted having the jewellery but he accused Ellen of sealed the Martha's share of Anthony's personal estate, having to when she had no to do so. This suit was one bonds illicitly after her marriage him, power several initiated the sisters Trubshaw and their mother over their inheritance, of by against Another centred on shares in two ships, worth £200, which, which were dealt with together. Trubshaw was accused of having appropriated.39 A third was a dispute over like the Elixir, 34 note 30 above, Pt 1, vol. 4, p. 268. Venn, op. cit., it At least one 35The suit was and two others were dealt with alongside (see below). particularly complex, same issue of other suit was launched the Daffy sisters against John Wyne on the (accusing Wyne aiding by of Ellen and Charles Trubshaw from Trubshaw in seizing their estate). The bill of complaint and answer traced in: C fols. 180v-81r, 189r, 1688 are in: NA, C 9/124/53; the proceedings can be NA, 33/271, May fols. C 33/279, fols. 159v, 249v-50r, 347v, 631v, 687r; C 33/273, fols. 30r, 93v-96v; C 33/277, 578v-79r; fols. 850v. A further suit 886v, 243v, 876v, 837r; C 33/281, 845r, 847v, 849r, by 878v, 880r, 883v, 882r, that Trubshaw had received more of the the sisters against Trubshaw was entered in 1697 alleging Daffy had known: C C 33/291, fols. 151r-51v. debts due to their father than they previously NA, 5/155/53, 36NA, C 33/271, fols. 249v-250r. 37NA, C 33/273, fol. 94v. 38NA, C 9/124/53, fol. 2. Martha v. Charles Trubshaw: NA, C33/273, fol. 30r. Daniel Parsons 39Daniel Parsons, Mary Daffy, Daffy to have returned bottles for Anthony Daffy, see 114B. also appears accepted 8 Introduction a bill of exchange in payment for Elixir received by one of Daffy's intennediaries, seized and taken to Benjamin May in Amsterdam [157B], which Trubshaw had law; on behalf of her on Ellen, however, had already received the money daughters, May's he direction.40 Again, Trubshaw's answer rested on his rights as her husband, and disputed as well as some of her assertions of fact. Ellen's ability to act independently, challenging remains unclear. He never in Court or Throughout, Elias's role in this affair appeared gave accused Trubshaw and Ellen. It is feasible that his a deposition, although alongside accusation like that of a evil in an to relieve Trubshaw was, Ellen, necessary attempt of as much of estate as He later claimed to have his share Anthony Daffy's possible. passed to the two girls, which might fit such an interpretation. However, descriptions of his earlier role are less positive: he was accused of having received a portion of Anthony's estate from Trubshaw in order to conceal it. One may also speculate that he and Trubshaw may have had a previous association at Cambridge.41 Sir Miles The Court referred the matter to the consideration of one of its judges, Cooke, of each Trubshaw who was to have an account of the estate and consider the claims party. and third and the division of the appears to have won the argument over the second suits, on the accounts allowed and Martha estate ordered in 1689 by Cooke viewing Mary only which were to be divided between them. Yet even this them: £178 and the jewels, escaped in instituted a further claim that had received ten years later, 1697, they asserting they from who had also received further nothing Trubshaw, by then, they claimed, moneys estate.42 the law suits seem to have ended owing to Anthony Daffy's Ultimately, poorly for much of the wealth did Anthony's daughters, consuming they possess. Certainly, Trubshaw did not the Elixir. stop producing him to in her to Ellen had moved with Early marriage Trubshaw, Daffy Salisbury Court, Bride. In even as the law suits which ran off Fleet Street, in the nearby parish of St 1688, As their broke began, she and Trubsaw seem to have still been living together. relationship his but she did not move far. Each lived in down, Trubshaw ejected Ellen from house, in small court. In Ellen was in the house known as separate houses the same 1693, living ball over the and a rival Elixir Dr Brown's, notable for the large golden gate, running in now described as rather business from there.43 Two years later, 1695, Ellen, again Daffy with her and Martha and a maid. Charles than Trubshaw, was living daughters Mary single now shared his house with his sister two and another Trubshaw Katherine, maids, woman, in the tax as "Grace Groat". that both Ellen and Charles named listing Interestingly, year were assessed as estates worth less than or £50 the estate of having £600, per annum; worth more than the £600 tax Anthony's son Elias Daffy, by contrast, was higher watershed.44 At the time of his death late in Trubshaw's fortunes increased thereafter. substantially which he included "elixir" and 1715, his substantial wealth-in explicitly "drugs"-is Martha v. Charles Trubshaw: fol. 30r. 40Richard Thompson, Mary Daffy, Daffy NA, C33/273, NA, C 33/277, fols. 578v-579r. 42NA, C 5/155/53; C 33/291, fols. 151r-v. Elixir T 1693. 43Ellen Daffy, Daffy's original andfamous Salutis, London, Milboum, fols. 116. Ellen and Eleanor seem to be used 44CLRO, MS Marriage Assessments, 104, 110, and Ellen describes herself as "Elleanor" in the her 1693 note 43 interchangeably here, pamphlet: op. cit., above. 9 Introduction indicated by the size of the bequests he left to his family: his sister Katherine received £2,500, another sister, Mary Withers, received £10 an annuity of a year, and her son Joseph got £100. The Daffys received nothing. Indeed, the bulk of his estate he left to "his wife" Grace Trubshaw. Charles Trubshaw and "Grace the Groat" Oveatt", plausibly "Grace living in his house in 1695, had married only shortly on 12 March before, 1714/15. Trubshaw was described as a widower in the marriage entry in the parish but register, it is not at all clear that this was actually the case.45 Pamphlets advertising Elixir for sale by Charles Trubshaw which were published in 1717 and 1719 do imply that Ellen had died by then, but they cannot be taken as straightforward proof of death, if only because they neglect to mention that Charles was himself dead by this time: it was, it seems, his second wife Grace Trubshaw who was issuing them under his name from their house in Salisbury Court.46 The assertion that Ellen had died may have been a business more strategy symptomatic of the division between the families than her actual mortality. Certainly, tax records and other sources in seem to suggest that Ellen Daffy was still alive and residence in Salisbury Court in 1724, although she would have been very old by then.47 We can only speculate about the here. It exact details of what was happening may be that Trubshaw's failing health had pushed him to bigamously formalize a longer- standing relationship so that he could at least attempt to bequeath his estate to Grace, despite the chance that Ellen might challenge this, a measure which could the explain marriage taking place in the parish of St Benet Paul's Wharf rather than St Bride's. Alternatively, Ellen Daffy's heirs may have perpetuated her name for some reason, perhaps to maintain the business, albeit that this seems less likely given that these are tax or records; there may have been another Ellen Daffy, though none of the family's children to appears have been given that name. Trubshaw had expressed the hope in his will that his widow Grace and sister Katherine could continue living together as they had done until then.48 His wishes seem to have been fulfilled, for in her own will Katherine her likewise left nearly all her estate to "dearly beloved sister-in-law" Grace, £10 her clothes. excepting only for sister Mary's mourning Katherine's only other wish reveals the should closeness between her and Charles: that she be buried in the same place as him in Trubshaw's Beckley, Kent.49 Under Grace control, the business seems to have operated as show that Grace before. Surviving receipts 45Willoughby A Littledale (ed.), The registers of St Benet and Paul's vol. St Peter, Wharf, London, 2, Marriages, St Benet, 1619-1 730, London, 1902-12, p. 131. Grace's surname is Oveatt in the original MS register: GL. Trubshaw certainly did not obtain a divorce by Act of Parliament. On the difficulties of divorce in early modern England, see Lawrence Stone, Road to divorce: England 1530-1987, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1990. 46Charles Trubshaw, Elixir Salutis, 1719. An edition London, 1717; C Trubshaw, Elixir Salutis, London, of the former is in the library of in the Wellcome Worcester College, Oxford, and of the latter Library, London. 47GL, MS 3425/ 2, fols. 7, 9. he be Chancellor suggests that Ellen did not die until 1732, but may mistaking her for Elizabeth Daffy, The her daughter-in-law, who died that year: E Beresford Chancellor, annals of Fleet Street: its traditions and No burial for associations, London, Chapman & Hall, 1912, p. 57. Ellen has been discovered in the registers of St Bride's or no will to survive St Martin Ludgate, and appears in the London or Archbishop of Canterbury's Courts. 48NA, PROB 11/550; Charles Trubshaw drew up his will and was 31 on 30 July 1715, probate granted Jan. 1715/16. 49NA, PROB 11/664, proved 27 Mar. 1734. Beckley is now in East on the border with Kent. Sussex, 10 Introduction continued to supply agents in the provinces in the In mid-1720s.50 1724, she was still living in one of the most expensive houses in the Court, paying £45 rent, rather more than the £30 rent Ellen Daffy was apparently paying at the time.51 Trubshaw's usurpation of the Elixir business did not prevent Daffy's daughters even- tually producing it themselves. By the time of her death in 1705, Mary Daffy had an established Elixir business of her own, as her father had apparently hoped. As she carefully specified, all her money and possessions, including her stock in trade of "Elixir ready made, druggs, bottles, glasses, vessels, and all other utensils and things whatsoever of or belonging to the Trade of making and selling Elixir" were left to her mother's use for her lifetime, and thereafter to her brother Elias's five children, Elizabeth, William, Susannah, Anthony, and Elias. The impact of the strife within the family is clear in the firm statement that they were for Ellen's "owne proper and particular separate use and not to be made use of by the said Charles Trubshaw or any other husband that said mother shall my happen to have"; one might reasonably suspect that these disputes also help explain own Mary's single state. Although Mary still held out the hope that money and jewels might come to her estate from Charles through the suit still pressing at Chancery, she was no longer as destitute as had been suggested at times in the 1690s. Indeed, in addition to her goods and business, she had a a fine gold watch, wrought bed, and a tenement in Brentwood, Essex, the last of which she gave to her sister Martha, her companion in so much trouble.52 The fortunes of Anthony's son Elias, rooted in the property and land left by his father, were less troubled than those of his daughters. Elias seems to have come down to London from Cambridge soon after his father's death. He married in Elizabeth Seyliard 1686, and they had at least eight children. For a time, Elias and his growing family remained in St Martin Ludgate, living in Prujean's Court at least until 1694.53 He appears to have done well, and by 1695, as we have seen, he qualified for the highest rate in the marriage assessment tax of that year, implying an estate of over £600 or land worth over £50 a year. Elias's stock seems to have continued to rise until his death, which appears to have occurred between 1705 and 1709.54 By the time his widow Elizabeth died in 1732, she had a considerable estate to bequeath. In part, this was in land. Estates at Hadlow and Brenchley (?Breuchley), Kent, valuable enough to have been mortgaged in the for past which were left £1,000, to her son William.55 Despite Elias's broader medical the practice, engine for the wealth continued to be family's the Elixir. At some point after 1704, the 50Receipts for payments for Daffy's Elixir Elizabeth to Grace Trubshaw: Staffordshire by Alsop Record Office, D1798/H.M. Drakeford/122. Charles Trubshaw was alive in when he a fine to avoid the office of 1703, paid constable: GL, MS 6554/2. 52NA, PROB 11/486. Will composed 12 April 1705; probate granted 19 Feb. 1705/6. was buried on Mary 14 Nov. 1705, somewhere other than St Bride's: GL, MS 6540/3. in 53'Four Shillings the Pound Aid 1693/4, City of London, Faringdon Ward St Martin Without, Precinct, Pridgeons Court', Centre for Metropolitan History. http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?compid=20208; accessed: 9 June was 54Elias alive when his sister Mary composed her will in 1705, but when John Harrison to sought rebut an attack on his Elixir business in it was 1709, Elias' wife Elizabeth not Elias he targeted: John Harrison, Advertisement. For asmuch as Mrs. Elizabeth Daffy has lately published an advertisement, invidious in relation to Elixir containing reflections upon me, my Salutis, [London], 1709. British Library, MS Harley 5931(121). MS 55GL, 1904. 11 Introduction family had moved from Prujean's Court to the parish of St Bride where Ellen and Mary lived, and it seems possible that after her death Mary's business was amalgamated with Elias's to form a single venture. Indeed, fragmentation between children was the opposite of Elizabeth's intention in passing on her Elixir business. In this Elizabeth was precise, stating explicitly that her son Anthony was to have "sole right Management and profit that arise from or by the sale or preparation of the Elixir publickly shall or may after my death Elixir with the stock of elixir in called or known by the name of Daffy Salutis, together my also all book was to have the house as well-the address Cellar and my debts"; Anthony being vital to the business. Beyond this, Elizabeth was rich enough to leave two other bequests of £1,000 and £1,200 to her granddaughter and niece respectively. The only other of her children who seems to have survived her was Susannah, now married to Thomas Cave, who had their debts to her cancelled, but received no large bequest for themselves or their daughter, Elizabeth Maria.56 The fate of the Daffy family is hard to follow after Elizabeth's death. Elias's son Anthony continued the business, being described as "preparer of Daffy's Elixir" in his obituary, but by the time he died in August 1750 he felt no need to be so precise in disposing of his affairs, simply leaving everything to his wife Mary.57 His widow did not survive him by many years, and died in 1758; they seem to have Ann been childless, and all the remaining estate went to her sister Acton.58 The Elixir Business Daffy's Account Book offers us a unique insight into the operation of a proprietary medicine business at the very beginning of the expansion in English commercial manu- facturing that occurred in the late seventeenth century. It is important to emphasize at the outset that it deals with only a single aspect of his business: the Elixir trade beyond London. We have no evidence of Daffy's day-to-day medical practice, his own direct trade in the Elixir-he made it abundantly clear in his advertisements that he could be found at home to Four in the for business "from Six to Twelve in the Forenoon, and from One lists of to the scale of his business Afternoon"-and nothing more than the agents suggest be considered in in and around London.59 All the calculations below therefore need to light amounts of Elixir distributed these other areas. What the of the additional unknown through Account Book does record in exacting detail are shipments of Elixir sent outside London, the debts of the and the received from with various recipients, payments them, together miscellaneous memoranda relating to the business. The earliest entry in the book is dated 9 March the last, probably entered by Ellen, dates from 15 March 1686 1673/4 [8A]; PROB Will 5 July 1732; probate granted 1 Sept. 1732. 56NA, 11/653. composed 57Gentleman's 20: 477; NA, PROB 11/782. Will composed 17 Sept. 1750; probate Magazine, 1750, in when their son granted 8 Oct. 1750. Elias and Elizabeth were still in St Martin Ludgate August 1704, Elias was born: GL, MS 3713. 58NA, PROB 11/839. Will composed 28 Nov. 1750; probate granted 3 July 1758. were so to 59Anthony Daffy, Elixir Salutis, London, 1674, p. 8. Not all patent medicine sellers receptive of declared in 1664 that he was "a their customers: Lionel Lockyer of Southwark, inventor Lockyer's pills, Man full of know how to time better then to answer 20 or 30 letters in a week, but business, & spend my for the I intend not to Letter that shall be sent unto me the account of future, answer any upon my Pills, how to take Lionel An advertisement those most excellent pills called Namely them"; Lockyer, concerning Pililae radiis solis extractae, London, 1665. 12 Introduction [134A], two years after the book had ceased to be used for most agents. The majority of entries in the Account Book end in 1683 or 1684. At that point, for a short period before his death, Anthony began to use a new account book that no longer survives. Thus, at either end of the period it covers, the Account Book overlaps with other, now lost, volumes. Accounts were entered in this book as the previous book filled up, and then in tum began to be moved on to a replacement volume in late 1683. Besides the account, Daffy also often refers to letters he received from agents, now lost, in which outstanding balances, damaged goods and other such matters were discussed; it is likely that he also kept other rough account books and journals. His extensive sales within London (whether wholesale or retail), evidenced by the long list of stockists in the capital which appear in his handbills adver- tising the Elixir, were presumably contained in a separate volume or volumes which again do not seem to survive, or were perhaps dealt with less formally. An account book of this kind seems on first appearance to be among the most reticent of historical sources. It is terse and repetitive, standing as a dry and dusty contrast to the discursive richness of contemporary merchants' letters, let alone the rambunctious asser- tions of proprietary medicine advertisements. It should not, however, be dismissed too quickly. The most obvious features of the account, the volume, value and rates of inter- change, may be easily abstracted and analysed, yet the Account Book rewards closer inspection. Where merchants' letters generally allow us to probe the depths of a few well-established mercantile relationships, accounts offer us a perspective across the breadth of an enterprise.60 The account records with as much felicity both those commer- cial encounters that lasted no longer than the time it took to exchange a shipment of Elixir for payment, and those that lasted for years. It therefore provides a balanced sense of the everyday grind of trade, of its pace and variety, and of the range of relationships-brief as well as long-that tradesmen engaged in. Much of the best recent work on early modern commerce has drawn attention to the significance of ties of credit that link individuals into networks of mutual interdependence. Daffy's Account Book shows some of the same concerns, but it also underlines the frailty of many such exchanges. As we will see, the Account Book also reveals other elements of the practice of business, for it constitutes a distinctive form of text which reveals throughout the marks of its use and creation. Each of the agents outside London to whom Daffy supplied Elixir has an in the entry Account Book, mostly over two facing pages headed with the agent's name, address and occasionally his or her occupation. Initially in alphabetical order, the accounts for his most important customers sometimes run over onto additional pages at the rear of the book. The format follows common contemporary accounting practice: on the left-hand page are lists of Elixir delivered on account to his agents as "debitors"; on the right-hand page are sums received (sometimes crossed through to indicate the balance had been paid in full) from the same person, as "creditor". Compiling business accounts is a skilled process, and the formula and techniques employed were only gradually being absorbed into the habits 60A number of excellent studies of merchants' letters have appeared in recent years: Simon D Smith (ed.), An exact and industrious tradesman: the letter book of Joseph Symson of Records Kendal, 1711-1720, of Social and Economic History, new series, 34, Oxford, published for the British Academy by Oxford University Press, 2002; Henry Roseveare (ed.), Markets and merchants of the late seventeenth the century: Marescoe-David letters, 1668-1680, Records of Social and Economic History, new series, 12, Oxford, published for the British Academy by Oxford University Press, 1987. 13 Introduction of early modern business.6' Daffy's Account Book reflects a stage in the development of book-keeping, in its avoidance of abbreviation, its incorporation of additional information, such as memoranda relating to a particular agent, the name of ships used and such like, and in its lack of annual balances, or regular balances for agents: the account was principally concerned with recording payment, not depicting a financial position.62 Indeed, Daffy's accounting could come close to breaking down in his busiest accounts, with evident confusion developing over which consignments had been paid for or were outstanding. The lack of a robust formal language of accounting is most apparent in the memoranda that Daffy included in a number of the larger in accounts, which the logic of costs and receipts is noted as if spoken aloud. Daffy's trade in the Elixir operated on a large scale. As can be seen from Table 1, over the eleven-year period covered by the book he sent over 65,000 half pints-4,000 gal- lons-of the Elixir to various agents throughout England, the British Isles, Europe and beyond in over 1,000 separate consignments. For the years which the Account Book covers most fully, 1678 to 1683, an average of over 9,000 half pints a year were dispatched. If we consider the cash value of Daffy's trade, we find that it was equally impressive. He sold the majority of the Elixir at 2s 6d for a half-pint bottle wholesale, the same price that it was retailed for in London, and sometimes raised the price to 3s. The Elixir was therefore pitched toward the upper end of the price range of contemporary proprietary medicines. It cost, for example, more than Clarke's Spirit of Scurvy Grass (ls a bottle), but sold for the same price as Charles Peter's Cordial Tincture and Percy's Cordial.63 The total face value of the Elixir which Daffy dispatched in these years, excluding balances for paid earlier was accounts, over £8,000. From 1678 to 1683, he was sending out from London an average of over £1,000 worth of Elixir each year, with consignments leaving year- round and only a minor lull from December to February. This compares favourably with the scale of the London publisher Francis Newbery's trade in Dr James' Fever Powders, one of the most popular eighteenth-century proprietary medicines, almost a century later: in 1768/9 Newbery sold packages worth and in £822, 1775 he sold £1,600 worth.54 Daffy inevitably received payments for the Elixir less frequently than packages were dispatched. None the less, when the entire Account Book is balanced the figures look healthy. Daffy recorded the dispatch of Elixir worth £8,543, and the receipt of in £6,735 payments (including balances outstanding from the previous Account Book), or 78.8 per cent of the face value of the Elixir. A significant proportion of Daffy's receipts were profit. With their high ratio of to weight value, drugs had always been worth shipping, but proprietary medicines offered a new level of return. Although Daffy asserted in public that his Elixir was "a costly preparation", this 61 Advice books for merchants were increasingly for popular, see, example, Stephen Monteage, Debtor and creditor made 2nd easie, ed., London, printed by John Richardson for Ben Billingsley, 1682. 62On accounting practice, see Grassby, op. note 6 184-9. cit., above, pp. 63Advertisement for Henry Clarke's, 'Spirits of Scurvy Grass Compound', Wellcome Library, EPB/ Ephemera, BF 39(b); Charles The cordial Peter, tincture, prepared Charles Peter by chyrugeon at his bathing-house in St. Martins-Lane near Long Acre, London, 1686; John Percy, An advertisement of concern to the city and nation, London Bodleian [c.1670], Library, C 12.6 (13) Linc. 64T A B Corley, 'Nostrums and nostrum-mongers: the growth of the UK patent medicine industry, 1635-1914' (unpublished paper). 14 Introduction Table I Annual Balances, 1674-1684 Debit Credit Wholesale Other Half-pints value of commodities Total Payments Year Dispatched Elixir (f) shipped (f) (F) received (f) 220 27.50 0.00 27.50 0.00 1675 528 66.00 0.00 66.00 2.00 1676 2,582 322.75 0.00 322.75 9.50 1677 7,112 888.96 1.19 890.15 468.40 1678 9,172 1,146.45 2.30 1,148.75 799.13 1679 7,143 892.83 192.37 1,085.20 855.45 1680 9,744 1,217.96 25.02 1,242.98 1,144.55 1681 9,947 1,243.33 14.21 1,257.53 1,010.95 1682 10,281 1,285.10 18.68 1,303.78 1,093.66 1683 8,365 1,045.58 0.90 1,046.48 992.30 1684 108 13.50 0.00 13.50 156.35 (Undated) (203.10)a Total 65,200 8,149.95 254.67 8,404.62 6,735.38 Meanb 8,823 1,102.89 36.38 1,139.27 909.20 (1677-83) (2,519) (314.82) (65.56) (318.22) (382.52) aSeveral payments lack clear dates, or are recorded as received after 1684. "The standard deviation is in brackets beneath the arithmetic mean. given does not seem to have been the case.65 A estimate of the costs of raw very rough ingredients for the Elixir indicates that these would have come to around 6d per half pint, justifying some of the assertions about excess profit levelled at proprietary medicines.66 Labour costs are impossible to estimate, but the production of the Elixir was not lengthy or labour- intensive. the Elixir main in Beyond itself, Daffy's expenses were glass bottles, transport, and printing of advertisements and the pamphlets of directions that were given away with he included the in for every bottle; cost of transport and letters the price he charged agents the Elixir, and books were included whether the Elixir was to or shipped England further 65Daffy, op. cit., note 9 2. above, p. 66The recipe used here is Bodleian Library, MS Ashmole, 1463, fol. 23. On recipes and production, see below. Reassuringly, an early eighteenth-century price estimate for 2 quarts of Elixir made using a rather different, probably more expensive, recipe gives a figure of just over 7d per half pint: George Weddell (ed.), Arcana Fairfaxiana manuscripta, Newcastle on Tyne, Mawson, Swan & Morgan, 1890, p. 166. The drug prices used in our estimate are, inevitably, very rough figures, and have by necessity been drawn from different dates, although most come from the mid-1670s. Prices changed regularly, and the price Daffy paid for bulk have been different to those supply may quite employed here. These figures are therefore likely to be overestimates. Price sources: Gideon Harvey, The family physician, and the house apothecary, London, T Rooks, 1676; John A Collection the and Dec. Houghton, for Improvement of Husbandry Trade, (29 1693), no. PROB For an attack on the 4, 74; NA, 4/17465 (1666). price and content of Lockyer's Pills, see William Johnson, or some animadversions two late H Agyrto-Mastix, brief upon treatises, London, Brome, 1665, p. 15 Introduction abroad.67 For the glass bottles we can establish the price he paid in early 1679, when he bought these from a Mr Willcox, one of the increasing number of glass manufacturers based in Bristol [121A].68 Even coming from Bristol, Willcox's bottles had been cheap: at the bulk price of 18 shillings for 14 dozen they cost just a penny and a quarter each [121B].69 Unfortunately, there is no price indicated for the printing costs he incurred for the production of his books of directions and advertising pamphlets. Transport costs were only a in small burden the shipping of such a high value product. Daffy rarely disaggregated charges for carriage or customs, yet they do survive on a few occasions.70 It is possible that the few figures we have are in unrepresentative, but the absence of other estimates we might take 5 per cent of the value as a rough, and likely too high, figure for his costs of carriage. The production and distribution of a standard box of 12 half of Elixir worth pints 30s might therefore cost around 6s for Is 3½/2d for and Is 6d for ingredients, bottles, carriage, or 8s 91/2d in total. Whatever printing and labour costs were involved must have been easily accommodated from the 21s or so of surplus that this left Daffy with. These are, it must be emphasized, very crude estimates, but they do suggest an order of magnitude for the profits that could be made in the proprietary medicine trade. Daffy's Elixir was, therefore, the foundation for a business that must have brought sizeable rewards to its manufacturer. It was also a national and international success. The majority of Daffy's agents in were England, but many were also in Scotland, Ireland or other countries. Beyond the England, by mid-1680s, Daffy's thirty-eight overseas agents were spread across the globe, throughout the English colonies and major trading posts, and across Western Europe and The main of his Elixir were in beyond. recipients Scotland, France, Holland, Ireland and New England. Some of these, particularly John and Elizabeth Ainsworth, based in Amsterdam, and the Edinburgh merchant William Blackwood junior, each received huge volumes of Elixir. The Ainsworths were most Daffy's important clients, purchasing more than £2,000 worth of Elixir over the period covered by the Account Book. Blackwood, who was responsible for 8 per cent of the total customs value of in Edinburgh's imports 1690, took over £800 worth; Daffy seems to have given Blackwood a monopoly on the Elixir in Scotland.71 This extensive network outside England was, in large part, a product of Daffy's efforts during the period covered by the Account Book. This reflects both Daffy's energy and the 67Even in the Netherlands, printed books went with shipments: 153A. the Bristol 68On glass trade, see David Hussey, Coastal and river trade in pre-industrial England: Bristol and its of Exeter 76-7. region, 1680-1730, University Press, 2000, pp. 69Willcox's price seems reasonable, although the painstaking list of every cost Daffy incurred in sending the remaining bottles he held to William Jordan suggests that his arrangement with Willcox had ended abruptly and unpleasantly. In 1692, glass bottles were at 2s 6d dozen in note priced per Houghton, op. cit., 66 above, 7 July 1693, 3, no. 49. Where, and at what price, Daffy obtained his bottles after this date is largely unclear, although after his death Ellen paid off a debt for bottles to one William Woodward. 70To ship a chest of 24 half pints to Gloucester cost 3s 6d [82A], only 6 per cent of the £3 it was worth; it was even feasible to send some Elixir by coach [87A]. Even in international shipments, carriage might be a small burden. Sending thirteen dozen half pints to Nantes in France cost Daffy a mere l5s [109A], barely cent of the 2.6 per £29 they were worth. Much more expensive was the 6s he paid Mrs Simmons for the and customs of of a from A freight one box dozen, worth only 30s, that she had sent Dover to France [64B]. to Dublin shipment worth £15 cost 4s for carriage (1.3 per cent of its value), but the collective charges and customs a for series of shipments worth £112 lOs came to £17 9s lOd (4.9 per cent) [72B]. 7 M 1See Helen Dingwall, Late seventeenth-century Edinburgh: a demographic study, Aldershot, Scolar Press, 1994, pp. 173-5. 16 Introduction __ . _MM Table 2 Anthony Daffy's trade beyond England Debitsa Credits Beyond England Beyond England Other Wholesale Total % of total Payments % of total value of commodities received receivedb Year Elixir (f) shipped (£) (f) dispatchedb (£) 1674 0 0 0 0 0 0 1675 0 0 0 0 0 0 1676 115.50 0 115.50 35.79 0 0 1677 480.51 0 480.51 54.05 169.25 36.13 1678 733.20 2.00 735.20 64.13 350.77 43.89 1679 551.70 127.56 679.26 76.08 431.49 50.44 700.51 61.20 1680 718.55 22.97 741.52 60.88 50.77 1681 738.55 13.41 751.96 60.48 513.22 65.03 704.63 64.43 1682 817.90 17.78 835.68 618.95 62.38 1683 624.95 0 624.95 59.77 0 0 43.18 27.61 1684 0 0 45.00 22.16 n.d. 183.71 60.92 3,576.98 53.20 Total 4,780.86 4,964.58 Mean 1677-83 666.48 26.24 692.73 62.92 498.40 52.75 (118.86) (45.60) (113.97) (6.80) (196.95) (10.52) a volume with merchants "at sea" as well as all consignments to Figures include dispatched based outside agents England. b annual see Table 1. For totals, 17 Introduction relatively fortuitous conditions for trade which followed Britain's withdrawal from the lifting of the depression in 1677. When wars on the continent in 1674, and particularly the The first eighty-seven pages the book was initially drawn up, it was ordered alphabetically. in in thus run from Ainsworth Amsterdam to Captain Edward Wilder Reading. Thereafter, agents were entered as they appeared, and it is in these pages that most of the foreign agents are recorded. Daffy was not without a foreign presence when he started this Account: his two most important agents, the Ainsworths and Blackwood, were already in place. But in 1674, with its main focus in the British Isles, and only the Ainsworths and a single agent in New England overseas, the network was a significantly more conservative one than that which he constructed in the next few years. The bulk of the overseas expansion came in 1678 and 1679, when nine and six new agents, respectively, were first sent Elixir. At this time, Daffy seems to have made a concerted effort to create a market in France, in particular, which following the Treaty of Nijmegen (1678) was newly at peace with the Netherlands after six years of war. He established contacts with five French agents in Elixir in 1679 alone, an effort reflected the unusually high proportion of shipped beyond that to have returned his attention to his English England year. Thereafter, Daffy seems network, to which seventeen agents were added in 1680, up from seven and eight in the previous two years. This retrenchment was, perhaps, a reflection of the somewhat bruising costs that several of his continental had inflicted on him, and the relatively small agents volumes these newer foreign agents were taking. Despite Daffy's efforts, the proportion of Elixir he was shipping beyond England did not grow significantly over this period, as Table 2 shows. In addition to these permanent dealers abroad, the Elixir was regularly sent on merchant voyages to be sold wherever a market was to be found. Some of these foreign traders sold the preparation on Daffy's behalf, rather than on their own account [1 15A]. in that he The terms of these arrangements are specified only one case, where Daffy notes had with William Ketch that he would have the or of whatever agreed Captain moiety, half, Between dealers and "they are sould for abov 3s per ½/2 pinte" [146A]. them, foreign merchant ventures consumed almost half of the Elixir dispatched from London. Within the extensive of the Elixir is clear from both the Account England, availability Book and the pamphlets Daffy published. The Account lists 132 agents spread across nearly every county. Of course, not all areas were sent the same amount of Elixir: amounts varied from £4 1Os worth dispatched to Huntingdonshire, to £390 worth sent to Yorkshire. Yet the extent of coverage is none the less impressive. To achieve this Daffy appears to have pursued a careful policy, consciously recruiting agents in areas where he was weak and avoiding doubling up agents in towns where he already had a representative. Indeed, he local of the Elixir. In seems to have effectively allowed his agents and regional monopolies one did the medicine to two based in the same only case, Yarmouth, Daffy supply agents town at same then with the new William Dean the time, and only briefly, agent receiving one a of were the sole dealers just shipment.72 Over quarter agents being supplied by Daffy in their county. That said, the Elixir might not be the only proprietary medicine they sold: the bookseller Church Simmons also retailed Peter's Cordial for Newbury Tincture, example. Dean was unusual in receiving a very large initial shipment of 60 half pints [129A]. Bowar, the other Yarmouth agent, had paid some money to Mr Dean earlier in 1677 [6B], suggesting that there may have been a more complicated relationship between Daffy and Dean than the account book reveals. 18 Introduction Distribution of Elixir by county Value of Elixir shipped (E) >200 100-200 50-100 25-50 410.00 <25 0 50 100 Km I I 0 50 100Miies The English distribution network for the Elixir included agents from a wide array of different trades and occupations. By far the most numerous were merchants (21) and booksellers (19). Grocers (6), coffee-sellers (7), shoe-makers (4), ship's commanders (5), and distillers also stand out as reasonably common occupations among Daffy's agents. (3) of Medical practitioners are notable by their absence. Two surgeons, Robert Torr Dorset or and John Mead of both purchased small amounts of Elixir, but no physician Essex, have of that this of the apothecary appears to sold any Daffy's remedy, suggesting part at existed from the medical proprietary medicine trade, least, quite separately regular in network of is world. The involvement of merchants and grocers Daffy's agents 19 Introduction unremarkable, given that medicines frequently featured in the businesses of both groups. the role Similarly, prominent played by booksellers was a characteristic of the trade in rooted in the proprietary medicines, importance of print advertising to the trade and the similarities between medicines and books as commodities: both were small, high-value, distributed from London.73 Mixes of homogenous goods medicine, book, and grocery were common. For John whom calls a selling example, Greenwood, Daffy bookseller, was described by an acquaintance in Lancaster as a "grocer and apothecary", and appears in the Lancashire Sessions records as Quarter "apothecary".74 Settled local businessmen such as Greenwood could expect considerable book credit from Daffy. However, at the other end of the economic spectrum were several agents who seem to have received Elixir on stricter terms, with their accounts being balanced between Mr every batch. Clark, a cutler in Windsor, for example, received twenty-four identical consignments of a dozen half pints of the Elixir.7s Every time, Daffy recorded that he had for his last and then paid batch, sent a replacement on the next day [91A]. This pattern of and raises the that Clark as a in pay receipt possibility operated chapman, stocking up London and then the wandering through country selling his goods, a traditional form of medicine that continued to as Jonathan has selling persist, Barry emphasized.76 Within various that his business was London, Daffy's pamphlet publications suggest also first known in was aimed expanding rapidly. Daffy's pamphlet, published 1673, solely at the metropolitan market. It directs the interested reader to eleven Elixir sellers in and around the capital, from Aldgate in the east to Westminster Hall in the west, and south across the river to Southwark. In the two years before the next edition of the pamphlet was in published 1675, Daffy's London network tripled in size to thirty-three dealers. As seems to be the case with provincial agents, it was his earliest relationships that were strongest. In all his 1673 London, agents appeared again, except two, Benedict Barnham and Thomas that he as "never his Booth, "expunged" more to have Elixir"; their offences are not but links to rivals or counterfeiters be best stated, may the explanations for Daffy's anger.77 The of differed somewhat from those of his occupations Daffy's metropolitan agents Booksellers and stationers still a but coffee- provincial agents. played significant role, house and shoemakers outnumbered while merchants were keepers grocers, missing for Robert Bateman's of The of 73See, example, "Spirit Scurvey-Grass". largest occupational grouping his 42 agents was eleven booksellers: Robert Eminent cures in several Bateman, lately perform'd diseases, by Batemans spirits of scurvey-grass, London, [c. 1681]; Marjorie Plant, The English book trade: an economic the and sale 3rd Allen & history of making of books, ed., London, George Unwin, 1974, p. 96; John Alden, 'Pills and publishing: some notes on the English book trade, 1660-1715', The Library, 5th 7: 21-37. series, 1952, 74J D Marshall (ed.), The autobiography of William Stout of Lancaster, 1665-1752, Manchester Press for the University Chetham Society, 1967, p. 145; A2A: Lancashire Record Office, Lancashire for Midsummer Quarter Sessions, petitions Lancaster, 1665, ref. QSP/273/3. 75A similar is for pattern apparent Birtchit, Mary Groves, and Saddington: 10, 24A, 75B. 76Jonathan and the medicine in in Barry, 'Publicity public good: presenting eighteenth-century Bristol', and Porter note 3 See also Bynum (eds), op. cit., above, pp. 29-39. Richard C Sawyer, 'Patients, healers, and disease in the Southeast PhD of Midlands, 1597-1634', thesis, University Wisconsin-Madison, 1986, p. 164. On more see The rural chapmen generally, Margaret Spufford, great reclothing of England: petty and their wares in the seventeenth Hambledon 1984. chapmen century, London, Press, 7 Harriet records how in 1668 the London chemist and Albertus Otto Faber refused to Sampson Quaker send further stock of his cordial to his Lincoln John after Mills had proprietary agent, Mills, bought medicines from another Harriet 'Dr Faber and his celebrated 34 supplier. Sampson, cordial', Isis, 1943, (6): 484-5. 472-96, pp. 20 Introduction altogether. How this network was developed is unknown, but it is striking that several of Daffy's agents were close colleagues in the Cordwainers' Company. The three city shoe- makers in the 1673 and 1675 pamphlets were all fellow liverymen of his at the time, and each in turn joined Daffy on the Court of Assistants of the Company.78 The construction of this extensive distribution network demanded luck, courage and entrepreneurial vigour. Establishing new agents was clearly one of Anthony Daffy's major concerns, and it was also the part of the business that carried most risk. The consequences of engaging in a relatively novel manufacturing business in which the product was unpro- ven in most markets are apparent in the terms of trade within which Daffy operated. These were similar to those adopted by many producers of more differentiated worked goods, and largely in the favour of his agents.79 He invariably sent out Elixir trust: consignments of on payment was never given in advance and sometimes he waited before two or three years receiving any returns. Any unsold bottles could be returned, freeing agents from risk if they failed to find a market, although the practical difficulties and costs of transport meant that few took advantage of this option.80 For Daffy, the easiest of recruits were based in agents England. These were often recommended by a third party, and they could also be pursued at law should they default on payment, although it is clear that other possibilities, including partial abatement of debts, were explored first.81 No such recourse was open if agents abroad defaulted: both distance and the near impossibility of legal action conspired against repayment. The risks are apparent in the relative levels of default he experienced. Foreign non-payment was much more common, and receipts from abroad were in general dis- proportionately low, as is apparent in Table 2. Indeed, 24 of the 38 foreign agents to whom he sent batches of the Elixir had paid nothing by the end of of 124 1683, compared with 27 home agents. Such foreign defaulters were also more costly to Daffy: initial consignments to destinations abroad were much larger than those sent into provincial England, averaging over £12 compared with under £5 for the provinces, reflecting the need to in transport greater where bulk supply was more difficult and slower. Unsurprisingly, information about the trustworthiness of potential agents that Daffy could from his garner contacts in London's mercantile community and abroad loomed large in his calculations. The extended lines of credit that were an innate part of his business put a premium on any information or ties It that might reduce the risk of default by agents. is no accident that the source of the recommendation or introduction that put him in touch with them is the only additional detail that he added to agents' names and addresses in his accounts. These notes of who recommended a customer potential implicitly emphasized their role as guarantor for the character of the new It that agent. seems Daffy generally relied on a relatively limited pool of referees. The largest number of six of introductions, thirty-eight, came from his "son-in-law" John Halford, a merchant factor who lived and worked in London. Most of the others came from individuals who acted for or Daffy helped 78John Bright, the Southwark shoemaker, does not appear to have been a member of the but Company, his base outside the city excused him from the need to be a freeman. similar terms relating to the 79For trial of Norwich toys and the sale of snakeroot, see Smith (ed.), op. cit., note 60 above, letters 168, 1129. 80Returns seem to have been made by Levarmore, Hogden and Wavell: 48B, 102A, 114B. 8 makes several notes of abatements in debts for agents or their estates: 84B, 120B, 143B. Daffy 21 Introduction in various ways, such as Mr Denew, the merchant through whom the Ainsworths often sent funds from Amsterdam. As Halford's involvement reminds offered one basis which us, kinship possible through a business could operate. However, it was inevitably limited in the size and extent of the network it provided.82 The Elixir had of course come into Daffy's hands through a family connection, and his more immediate family helped in London, where John Halford acted son on his behalf in the docks, as well as helping recommend foreign contacts. Daffy's Elias's role is unclear, although he had some contact with his father's agents when he was in and had him receive at school in France, for Daffy sent him a cheese there 1679, money Mr in in The role Ellen and his other children is from Bruce Nantes 1681 [130B]. played by a his also uncertain. More distant family played less significant part, though brother-in-law, was a customer in Worcestershire. John Halford (father of the London merchant) regular often noted ties of his and this served as one of the recom- Daffy kinship among agents, mendations he relied upon in extending his network, and a mechanism through which could be transferred from distant to London. John Greenwood's son payments regions Augustine took over from him, for example, while Mrs Rand and Mr Smith both had payments made by children [25, 62, 65]. Kinship is, however, most obvious in the number of instances where widows continue their husbands' businesses, as occurred with the Ainsworths , the Holmsteds , and the Kimbars . Elizabeth Lem  had Account Book. Several similerly taken over from her deceased husband, prior to this the of the other accounts continued in the hands of successors to businesses original agents. in Exeter as Briant does George May seems to take over from Abisha Brockas , Gaving seems to have died in Cambridge, where Edward Challis possibly . another means to commercial links. seems Religion provided develop Although Daffy have a number of his were and this have himself to conformed, agents dissenters, may provided the connections that underlay at least part of his network. Much of this may, it is worth have at one remove the of John who could noting, happened through agency Halford, give Daffy an entry into the Quaker networks that were to prove so important in many successful trading concerns by providing business information and some assurance of honest conduct.83 Halford's father and brother-in-law, the wealthy Worcestershire Daffy's lawyer John Halford senior, was a Quaker, and a friend of the movement's founder, George Fox. Indeed, Fox was staying at Halford's house in Armscote when he was arrested influence that and imprisoned in Worcester gaol in 1673. It is suggestive of Halford's Worcestershire the number of for Warwickshire and provide largest agents Daffy's in these Edward Warner of Elixir-twelve all. At least one of agents, Blockley , also to have been a Essex is the next most recommended by Halford, appears Quaker. with nine and a the Vandewalls represented region, agents, again prominent Quaker family, of Harwich them. A number of other also have , appears among Daffy's agents may been Quakers: Thomas English of Pontefract , George Hutchinson of Sheffield , and Samuel Barlow ofLeeds all in the West of and Susannah Moone , Riding Yorkshire, R The sort: and the in Hunt, middling commerce, gender, family England, 1680-1780, 82Margaret Berkeley, California University Press, 1996, pp. 22-45. and Atlantic trade in the seventeenth 83Nuala Zahedieh, 'Making mercantilism work: London merchants 6th ser. 156. See also century', Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 1999, 9, pp. 143-60, p. 484-6. Sampson, op. cit., note 77 above, pp. 22 Introduction of Bristol A . larger number were certainly dissenters of some kind: John Bromly in Chesterfileld, John and Augustine Greenwood of Lancaster, Thomas Hurst of Horsham, Elizabeth Lem of Westchester, William Churchill of Dorchester, Thomas Feilder of And- over, and Edward of Hope Devizes. Some, such as Thomas English and Edward Hope, were quite prominent, and had properties licensed for dissenting worship.84 More speculatively, we might note that Adam Martindale's patron Lord Delamer, whom Daffy may have been cultivating with gifts of was a Elixir, leading Presbyterian. Similarly, Daffy's contacts amongst London's Huguenot community assisted him in the sale of his Elixir France. to James Denew, Elias Dupuy, Isaac Jurin and Isaac Dellilers were all London prominent merchants of Huguenot origin whose names appear in the Account Book. Personal connections were not always enough, particularly in the difficult of task penetrating more distant foreign markets. Daffy allowed chance to a here: the play part Elixir was regularly sent on merchant voyages to be sold wherever a market was found. He also made more focused efforts. Some of Daffy's existing foreign agents assisted him, acting as intermediaries and perhaps also as guarantors. Sewell in Ireland and the Ainsworths both sent parcels on to other agents. In addition, Daffy offered incentives to Elixir encourage people to try his and to build ties with his agents. On several occasions, he gave foreign agents free additional bottles of the as part first or second shipment he dispatched to them. These could serve to develop the trading relationship, as with the dozen he sent to Jenkin Thomas in Tangier "for a token" [11A]. Equally, they might be used as free samples to win over new customers. Alexander in Constantine Leghorn received an extra half-dozen bottles that, Daffy noted, "I order to be Given to his frends" away [123A]. Daffy also used a more targeted approach to win patronage for his medicine among prominent members of communities: he included "6 for a token to the Consall" in a shipment to Venice [127A], and sent two dozen to the "ministar of the English Congrega- tion in Amstardam" [153B]. In this, Daffy's approach to his foreign agents was clearly different to that he for took his English distributors. He did give similar gifts to some but these were provincial agents, generally made only after they had taken three or four rather than at the start of the shipments, relationship. Interestingly, this policy of distributing gifts to have been a he found or potential patrons may strategy ineffective in the unnecessary long-term, as only one such gift is recorded after the close of 1679.85 For all Daffy's efforts to build his business it is network, quite clear that many of the relationships he initiated were not the of long-lasting. Indeed, majority Daffy's business ties were short-term, whether due to it difficult to sell the Elixir or for other agents finding reasons. Almost 60 per cent of the agents in the Account Book took less than five consign- ments of the Elixir from with 38 per cent receiving only a single shipment. The Daffy, brevity of many arrangements is underlined by a comparison of the names of agents in the Account Book with the list of provincial sources Daffy appended to the pamphlet he in in published 1674, the year which the earliest dates in the Account Book are noted. the in Despite proximity time and the likelihood that Daffy would have published only the names of agents who would probably continue to sell the Elixir (he did not name a specific 84G Turner Lyon (ed.), Original records of early nonconformity under persecution and indulgence, 3 vols, London, T Fisher Unwin, 1911-14, vol. 1, pp. 136, sent additional bottles as three in 85Daffy gifts to provincial agents 1678, two in 1679 and one in 1680; he sent gifts to international agents once in and twice in 1678 and 1679 1677, respectively. 23 Introduction third of the he of in the agent for around a places listed), only three-quarters agents pamphlet appear in the Account Book (48 of 63). The high level of wastage continued in the following years. In 1680, five years after the pamphlet was published, only 25 of the agents listed in 1674 received consignments from London; by 1683, the number had fallen yet further to just 13 survivors. Yet, alongside the large number of people whose involvement in the Elixir trade was momentary, there was a small core of individuals who regularly bought quite large con- the first few signments over long periods. Once agents had successfully moved beyond First shipments they tended to continue to receive the medicine for relatively long periods. John and Elizabeth Ainsworth in among these leading agents were, of course, Amsterdam, who a fifth of all the Elixir that from London this in took Daffy shipped during period, in the scale of their involve- value just topping £2,000. The Ainsworths were exceptional volume of other and it seems ment. Together they received more than double the any agent, as wholesalers for a network of retailers of the Elixir in the likely that they operated Netherlands. somewhat behind the Ainsworths in terms of the value of their Although the next tier of still had and value involve- business, agents significant long-running high ments in the Elixir business. Only the Edinburgh merchant William Blackwood' and Sewell in Dublin took over £500 worth of the but another 9 George Elixir, bought more than £100 worth, while a further 17 agents received between £50 and £100 which sent worth. None the less, if we look at the frequency with Daffy consignments and out to even his largest agents, we still find that shipments were generally irregular in month widely spaced. Even the Ainsworths received more than two shipments a single two or three month break between on only one occasion, and they regularly experienced a receiving a consignment. In seems to have relied on merchant factors to deal with the these overseas trades, Daffy of and customs on his behalf once the of Elixir had practicalities shipping consignments been and under his care. John Halford's name a number of times prepared packed appears in the London Port Books loading "Apothecarys wares" onto the ships named in Daffy's Account Book.86 also used other factors. On 11 for he sent Daffy July 1677, example, goods to William Sanders in Barbados on board the Active, to Ainsworth in Amsterdam on board the Friends and to Blackwood in on board the Adventurer. Adventurer, Edinburgh a William not All three consignments are registered as "Apothecarys wares" with Ball, recorded in the Port Book as merchant.87 In the actual selection of Daffy, shipping, Daffy vessel was available on the route he followed the usual practice of employing whichever for a or fifteen needed. There is little indication of any substantial preference ship captain: different took to William Blackwood in between 1676 captains shipments Edinburgh July and November and carried the Elixir to John and Elizabeth Ainsworth in 1683, twenty-five Amsterdam between and For the latter one January 1676/7 February 1683/4. journey, only to have been used on a basis: Jacob Hendarix captain appears anything approaching regular or master of the Goulden Floundar.88 At the other end of the often Hendaricks, line, Daffy relied on to for Elixir to be sent on to locations not accessible major agents arrange directly 86For NA fol. 198r. example, E190/76/1, NA fols. 157r-158r. E190/72/1, merchants such as Charles Marescoe and Jacob David show a similar Larger seventeenth-century pattern: Roseveare (ed.), op. cit, note 60 above, p. 579. 24 Introduction from London, as we have seen. This method did have its risks. When Daffy sought to send large consignment of 36 dozen half pints of Elixir worth £46 16s on a three stage journey from London to Saumer, via Elias Dupuij of Bordeaux and then Mr Bruce of Nantes, they never reached their final destination [109A]. A successful manufacturing and distribution business was more than a matter of assign- ing chests to a ship's captain or one of the carriers or coastal vessels which hauled commercial goods between London and provincial towns and villages. The effort and care with which he sought and cultivated agents has already been noted. But the exigencies of trade had a wider effect. Daffy had, most obviously, developed a product that was deliberately standardized in order to facilitate commerce, and which had specific char- acteristics that made it well suited to long-distance shipping, as we will see. His chests of Elixir were regular in size, each with 12, 24 or 48 bottles. He kept a careful eye on shipments abroad, making a note of the mark he had put on each chest in the margin of the account. Where chests went missing, Daffy sought to track down the point where his arrangements had broken down, and where bottles broke in transit, he repaid the loss to the agent. He adapted his product to its major markets by producing specific editions of his advertising pamphlet. A version was printed in Dutch for the Ainsworths, and another was made for Sewell in Dublin.89 Daffy also helped his agents with a diverse range of tasks for which they needed a representative in London. Some of these were business related: he sent John Kimbar of Bristol 40 shillings worth of farthings, presumably to relieve a of shortage specie [44A]. Others were more unusual: Jeffrason of Kirkby Stephen in Westmoreland seems to have shirts sent, for example, while Daffy repeatedly sends batches of viol and "fiddle" strings to Stobart in Durham, and oil, colour and brushes to Bromly of Hadleigh, Essex [40A, 70A, 7A]. Success on this scale bred trouble for proprietary medicine makers. Production was unregulated and counterfeit medicines flooded the market in the wake of any commercial triumph. Disputes about who was producing the original, authentic or best version of particular medicines were rife from the 1660s onwards, and Daffy was no exception. Counterfeit Elixir Salutis was already a problem for him by when he first went 1673, into print. Indeed, it seems likely that it was the threat from rival producers, particularly Thomas Hinde, that led him to issue his first pamphlet. Hinde was the subject of an aggrieved notice in all Daffy's pamphlets, in which he was accused of having "by Subtle suggestions and crafty insinuations" obtained the knowledge of "some but of (though few) the Ingredients ... and published the same, as the Entire and perfect Elixir it self".90 Daffy asserted that Hinde's crime was compounded by his ingratitude: he was a former patient who had been cured by the Elixir after the efforts of the physicians had failed. Hinde was not alone in challenging Daffy over the Elixir. In 1679, a Thomas Witherden of Bearstead in Kent published a pamphlet advertising his own "Elixir Salutis", which echoed Daffy's in many respects. Witherden's Elixir was, moreover, cheaper, at only 2s a bottle; Daffy openly attacked Witherden, along with "new another six upstart 89 Anthony Daffy, Elixir Salutis: of den uytgelesen gesondheyts-drank ... Van myn huys in Prujans Court, in den Oude Bayle, London, London [n.d]. Copies survive in the US National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, and the New York Academy of Medicine Library, New York. Anthony Daffy, Elixir Salutis ... at Mr George Savell's... in Golden-Lane, Dublin, [n.d.]. A copy survives in Cashel Cathedral Library, Eire. 90Anthony Daffy, Elixir Salutis, London, T Milboum, 1673, p. 2. 25 Introduction Counterfeiters ... and Ape-like Imitators", in a vitriolic pamphlet published some time in the 1670s.9' In 1680, Daffy even felt obliged to publish a newspaper advertisement informing his customers that he was not dead, as his rivals had been reporting.92 Hinde's "unsufferable abuse to the People, and an apparent wrong to my self" had prompted Daffy in to make use of safeguards against rivals. These might be quite labour intensive. His seal red wax was affixed to each pamphlet and bottle in order that customers could be sure they were buying the real elixir. It was a problem that faced many proprietary medicine producers, whose ingenuity in designing devices to distinguish the authentic product from its imitations-sealing, tying with coloured threads, using specially shaped or, later, embossed bottles-was matched only by the speed with which they were copied.93 Although the Elixir was the foundation stone of his business, Daffy also sought to diversify his interests, as befitted the aspirant merchant-manufacturer. One aspect of this was his decision to invest in shipping. This was a common choice for many of the merchants of London, who were reminded with every shipment they arranged of the potential profits of this area. Daffy personally owned a share in at least one ship, The William and Mary, and was involved in building another, The Arabella, at the time of his venture partnerships that were death.94 Daffy also participated in some of the short-term established for overseas trade. In this, he was not wholly successful. At the time of his he was for debts of over £100 to a venture he death, being sued outstanding relating joint had engaged in with John Playford, the publisher who also sold his Elixir [83aB], and one the Trevisa Anthony Chambers. The case was brought by the executor of merchant Richard who, in 1680, had procured several "great chests and other quantities of Lemons and other and to London for and his co-defendants.95 goods merchandice" from Seville Daffy It was not just lemons that caught Daffy's eye. The international network that he developed for his Elixir produced other potentially profitable opportunities of the kind that were becoming abundant in the international commerce of the period.96 The great majority of the consignments of Elixir that he shipped were paid for by bills of exchange or him the cash settlements. But some of these transactions with overseas merchants gave find market in opportunity to take payment in other kinds of goods for which he might a in he remained one of the London. Daffy's investments these areas were never large; in merchants. For hundreds of small speculators who operated the shadow of the greater in one of the most commodities from the his example tobacco, popular coming Americas, efforts million of tobacco London were tiny when set against the eleven pounds weight merchants in 1676 alone. did receive a of from his imported Daffy couple shipments agents in Virginia, which he sold on to John Ainsworth and Benjamin May in Amsterdam and George Sewell in Dublin. However, this was a matter of six or eight hogsheads, two or three 9l Thomas Witherden, Elixir Salutis: or the great preservative of health called by some, the never-failing cordial of the world, London, 1679; Daffy, op. cit. note 9 above. 92The True News: or Mercurius Anglicus, no. 32, 6-10 Mar. 1679/80. The notice was reprinted in no. 33, 10-13 Mar. 1679/80. It was in fact his cousin, Daniel Daffy, who had recently died (see note 15). 93Daffy, 1673, op. cit., note 14 above, p. 2; see Styles, op. cit., note 3 above, pp. 124-69. C fol. 95r. 94NA, 33/273, 95NA, C 9/426/120. rise in the seventeenth and 96Ralph Davis, The of the English shipping industry eighteenth centuries, Newton Abbot, David and Charles, 1972, pp. 16-17. 26 Introduction thousand pounds weight of tobacco at most.97 Daffy also ventured into sending out addi- tional consignments of English produce and manufactures several times. To Samuel Lockly in Seville, for example, he sent firkins of butter, six hundredweights of Cheshire cheese, and gloves. Daffy also acted on behalf of some of his agents in their own affairs. He arranged consignments of pewter to William Sanders in Barbados, paying the charges, customs and freight for it, at the same time as he was receiving consignments of cotton, ginger and sugar from him, seemingly in exchange for the Elixir [94A]. He also occa- sionally sent ventures abroad in textiles, including Colchester bayes, cloth which came from the area near his country house, and made small efforts domestically to trade in butter, cheese, oats and malt. We lack figures for some of these ventures, which were kept partially off the books, but the goods he shipped out were worth only £85 or so, while his imports, although somewhat larger, were small compared to the Elixir. After Anthony: The Elixir Trade from 1685 Onwards After Daffy's death, the Elixir business he had founded continued. As we have his seen, widow Ellen, Charles Trubshaw, and Anthony's daughters Mary and Martha all disputed the of ownership the Elixir recipe. Each seems to have produced the remedy independently. Anthony's son Elias was also producing Elixir by 1700, basing himself at the old house in Prujean's Court that he had inherited. Elias was even competing with Charles Trubshaw for the substantial Dutch market for the Elixir.98 Ellen's share of the business, at least, seems to have thrived. A 1693 pamphlet which she published-using much the same text as the 1675 edition, with the exception of the diatribe against Hinde-contains a guide to 121 agents in thirty-seven counties, exceeding the number that Daffy had claimed. Trubshaw's business and that of his widow Grace also appears to have been a success, as was discussed earlier. However, production of the Elixir slipped outside the bounds of Anthony's immediate heirs relatively quickly. Distant family played a part in this. The Elixir business found a new entrant in its inventor Thomas Daffy's daughter Katharine. She established her own net- work, primarily in London, in the early eighteenth century. In her pamphlet and newspaper advertisements, she asserted that her Elixir was the finest sold, to: prepared according the Original Receipt, which my father Mr. Thomas Daffy, late Rector of in the of Redmile, Valley Belvoir, having experience'd the Virtues of it, imparted to his Kinsman Mr. who Anthony Daffy, the same to the Benefit of published the Community, and his own great This Advantage. very Original is now in Receipt my possession, left to me by my Father aforesaid, under his own Hand.99 97 In 1676 the London tobacco trade was divided between the 70 per cent of imports accounted for by sixty large enterprises, and the 30 cent that fell to remaining per 513 small firms and individuals, who averaged about 64001b each Jacob M Tobacco in Atlantic annually: Price, trade: the Chesapeake, London and Glasgow, 1675-1775, Aldershot, Variorum, 1995, Frederick F The roots southern III.9-10; Siegel, of distinctiveness: tobacco and society in Danville, Virginia, 1780-1865, Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina Press, 1987, p. 65. 98Elias Daffy issued a pamphlet for the Dutch market which ends with a Elixir "warning" against made by "Charles Trubschown" and "John Neuman": Onderrigtingen gegeven van Dr Tot Antony Daffy, het gebruik van zyne ongevaarlyke, onschadelyke en voor veel menschen cordialen gelukkige drank, genaamt Elixir Salutis, welke na zyn dood gecontinueert is te maken, by zyne nagelatene wed. Elio Daffy, [no place, no A date]. copy is in the Wellcome Library, London. 99Katharine Daffy, op. cit., note 13 above. Katharine published the same claim in The Post Boy, 15-17 Jan. 1707/8. 27 Introduction of the Elixir with Anthony Daffy, as well as Katherine thus weakened the association challenging his heirs' businesses. the production of the Elixir in England became As the eighteenth century progressed, fragmented, with a number of different firins selling what each claimed was increasingly counterfeiters Daffy faced when alive, the earliest the genuine product. Apart from the outside the Daffy family who we know of appears to have been John Harrison, producer who by 1709 had had the good fortune to rent the old Daffy house in Prujean's Court. The association between the Elixir and that house was by that time unsubtly reinforced by a sign: "The Original and Famous Elixir Salutis" written in golden characters over the door fronting the gate into the court. Elias or his widow must have disposed of the house in the first years of the century, and Harrison soon had what he portrayed as a thriving Elixir business based there. Harrison was not, he claimed, without links to Anthony Daffy, time before the Death of however. He asserted that he had "known the Secret some been "communicated to me in the his [Elias's] Father Dr. Anthony Daffy", it having Sea, where in divers Countries, Year 1684, at the time I was going to travel beyond Elixir has been taken by Persons of the greatest Rank, considerable Quantities of my for a proprietary medicine advertisement, Harrison's Quality and Note".1°° Typically claim is implausible given Anthony's secrecy, and he receives no mention in the Account Book to substantiate it. the 1730s a number of London manufacturers can be identified: a London chemist, By A Downing, was making the Elixir, still priced at 2s 6d a bottle, alongside his cheaper itch- water and Spirits of Scurvy-Grass; a Mr Bradshaw produced both Daffy's and Stoughton's while York Elixir at his "Elixir Warehouse" at the back of the Royal Exchange; the printer of Thomas Gent thought that it was Mr Robert Staples who was "the celebrated disposer in devices to Dr. Daffy's elixir".101 Competition spurred yet further investment distinguish the later eighteenth century, the their products. For example, one of the main producers of embossed their bottles with the statement: "True Daffy's Elixir, printers Dicey & Co, & Co No 10 Bow Church Yard London. Unless the Name of DICEY & Co is in the Dicey is The Diceys were pluralists, also being Stamp Over the Cork the Medicine Counterfeit". of Drops, Lockyer's Drops and several other proprietary major producers Bateman's Their terms in this business were much the same as those Daffy had given, medicines. payment on sale, not receipt, and giving shopkeepers the right to return unsold allowing had it.102 It seems that as production spread and the Elixir no matter how long they kept authenticity of the Elixir grew ever less certain, the price it sold for fell. By 1786, the this hubbub of Bristol printer William Pine was selling the Elixir for only Is 8d.103 Amidst set in Court off Fleet manufacturing, the establishment Trubshaw and Ellen up Salisbury was as the source for the Elixir in the Street seems to have survived. Salisbury Court given note above. '°°Harrison, op. cit., 54 1O0 accessed: 12 Dec. 2004. 16 Oct 1728: Old Bailey proceedings online, www.oldbaileyonline.org, on 13 Monsieur Belloste's Another advertisement by Downing appeared May 1730; Hospital Surgeon, The Mr. Thomas Gent: printer, of York, written by himself, London, 1737; Joseph Hunter (ed.), life of T 4. London, Thorpe, 1832, pt. C Hill v. in R C in R C Simmons (ed.), The '02NA, 12/28/25. Dicey. Quoted Simmons, 'Introduction', and Marshall accessed: 12 Dec. 2004. Dicey catalogue, http://www.bham.ac.uk/DiceyandMarshall/, 103 E and the in Bristol, Cambridge University Mary Fissell, Patients, power, poor eighteenth-century Press, 1991, pp. 45-7. 28 Introduction list of 202 proprietary medicines published in the Gentleman's Magazine in 1748.'04 As late as 1794, a J Swinton still had a Daffy's Elixir Warehouse there. The Elixir continued to be widely manufactured and sold throughout the nineteenth and the early twentieth centuries, in sometimes the hands of ongoing business dynasties. In 1910, Sutton & Co., the successors to Dicey & Co., were still making the medicine.106 The international trade in the Elixir also continued to flourish in the eighteenth century. We know little about its fortunes in mainland Europe, but it was certainly prominent among the selection of proprietary medicines imported in large quantities into North America throughout the period. Advertisements for the Elixir were a regular feature in New England newspapers. Characteristic of the genre was the advertisement Charles Russell, who kept the "Galen's Head" in Charlestown, Massachusetts, placed in the Boston News-Letter on 26 November 1761. He had, he informed the readers, just received a consignment of drugs and medicines on the latest ships from London; among them were Bateman's and Stoughton's Drops, Lockyer's, Hooper's, and Anderson's Pills, British Oil, and Daffy's Elixir.'07 As Russell's advertisement suggests, the North American colonies do seem to have differed from England in lacking the division between retailers of proprietary medicines and other kinds of drug that we can observe from Daffy's lists of agents.'08 Thus, in 1762 Thomas Lloyd, a druggist in Virginia, kept a range of simples and proprietary medicines, stocking rhubarb, spirits of hartshom, black brimstone and senna alongside fourteen boxes of Lockyer's Pills and a more three bottles of Elixir.'09 Not meagre Daffy's all such proprietary medicines were genuine imports, of course. With the widespread publication of recipes, local production must have accounted for a significant amount, even if the consumer may not have been aware of it: in the 1750s and 1760s, the apothecary in Williamsburg, for example, ordered sizable quantities of empty "Stoughton vials" and occasional lots of Daffy's Elixir bottles from London."°0 What was the Elixir? There is one Elixir obvious question yet to be addressed: what was the Salutis? As might be the is no expected given great secrecy that surrounded its production, there straightfor- ward answer to this question. Daffy's enthusiasm in spreading the news of the applications of his Elixir was matched his obsessive about its and mode of by secrecy ingredients manufacture. Keeping this knowledge in his own hands was a vital element of his business strategy, as it was for all proprietary medicine manufacturers. As a no consequence, recipe in his own hand, nor that of Thomas Daffy, survives. Indeed, it is not clear that the Elixir 04Gentleman's Magazine, 1748, 18: 348. Kent's directory for the year 1794, London, Richard & Henry Causton, 1794, sub. "Swinton". 106A C Wooton, Chronicles ofpharmacy, 2 vols, London, Macmillan, 1910, vol. 2, 173. p. op. cit., note 1, above, ch. 1; Virginia Gazette, 20 June 1745. For numerous other Young, advertisements, see accessed http://www.pastportal.com/cwdl_new/va-gazet/html/d/dabbs-dandridge.htm, 12 Dec. 2004. '08 See Norman Gevitz, "'Pray let the medicines be good": the New England apothecary in the seventeenth and in 41: early eighteenth centuries', Pharmacy History, 1999, 87-101. 10918 Nov. 1762: the settlement in Lyman Chalkley (compiler), Chronicles of Scotch-Irish Virginia, 3 vol. 101. 1745-1800, vols, Baltimore, Genealogical Publishing Co., 1966, 1, p. °0Young, op. cit., note 1 above, p. 14. 29 Introduction that sold was identical to the medicine that Thomas had In Anthony Daffy Daffy produced. one of his publications, Anthony asserted that he had by my own Experience and Reading, add[ed] a considerable number of Ingredients unto that Receipt, for making Elixir, (then tofore, by my worthy and honoured Friend confer'd upon mee) and did also much vary from the said Receipt, both in the Quantities and Qualities of those Ingredients in the said Receipt specified: And I do further affirm, that neither my said Friend, himself, (from whom, at first, I had the said Receipt) or any other man (my self only excepted) either doth, or at any time did know all the Ingredients, (much less, their quantities)... 111 to ensure the Again, this was a technique used by other proprietary medicine manufacturers of exclusivity their product by asserting the originality and superiority of their recipe over that used by their copyists.112 his the to it soon Yet despite all the efforts of Daffy and family to keep recipe themselves, out and to circulate around the extensive networks which medical slipped began through knowledge, and particularly prescriptions, were diffused in early modem England. From manuscript, the recipe also found its way into an increasing number of the popular printed collections of recipes that were issued in large numbers from the sixteenth to the nineteenth century. By the early eighteenth century it even appeared in official publications, albeit sometimes in modest disguise: a recipe for "Elixir Salutis" with no mention of Daffy appeared, for example, in the College of Physicians' official Pharmacopoeia Londinensis in 1724, and another was inserted into its Scottish equivalent, the Pharmacopoeia Edinburgensis."13 A number of recipes for Daffy's Elixir have thus survived. However, they collectively reveal the influence of the second factor that prevents us from obtaining reliable into the that was For the Elixir's insight product Anthony Daffy selling. ingredients were subject to the same process of conscious adaptation and variation-and unconscious scribal error in characterized the of all medicines of the As a copying-that recording day. result, we have not one, but several Elixirs. That said, if we compare the recipes we can obtain a sense of what the Elixir was most likely to have been like. Some elements were common to all or almost all Elixir recipes. At its most basic level, every version was an infusion of various ingredients in some kind of distilled alcohol. The choice of medium varied over time between precise aqua vitae, proof and but in each case it is clear that the alcohol content of the final Elixir spirits, brandy, would have been high, guaranteeing a tonic effect for the patient at the very least. It was the preservative qualities of the distilled alcohol which made the Elixir such a good commodity an also the method of for long-distance trade. This reliance on alcohol base simplifled as medicines Elixir nor- production. Rather than requiring distillation, many did, recipes dictated that the should be left to infuse in the for several mally ingredients simply spirits between four and with several times a At the end of days, generally ten, regular stirring day. "' l Daffy, op. cit., note 9 above, p. 2. 112 for the unlearned and See, example, George Starkey, George Starkey's pill vindicatedfrom alchymist all other 3-4. pretenders, London, n.d., pp. of of Medicorum Royal College Physicians London, Pharmacopoeia Collegii Regalis Londinensis, London, T Wood for R Knaplock et al., 1724, p. 27; Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh, Pharmacopoeia Collegii Regii Medicorum Edinburgensis, Edinburgh, J Paton, G Stewart & J Gillan, 1722, in A p. 53. An early published version of 'Elixir Salutis' appears George Wilson, compleat course of chymistry, London, 1699, p. 261. 30 Introduction this period, the Elixir could be simply strained and bottled. This made the medicine an easy project for home production, demanding little if any skill of the householder. The essential simplicity of the Elixir recipes had obvious implications for Anthony Daffy's own production process. The manufacturing of the medicine could be carried on almost anywhere with little assistance, and thus little risk of the secret recipe being appropriated by an employee, even in the production of quite large quantities. It is inter- esting that this was a very similar process to that used for another successful proprietary medicine, Dr Stoughton's Elixir, in the early eighteenth century."4 Although he owned a still, Daffy bought at least some of the base spirits for the Elixir from other sources: he owed £35 for spirits at his death." It also had the advantage of requiring no more than a small investment of capital in apparatus, something reflected in the low value of the manufacturing stock listed in Daffy's posthumous household inventory. For the mass producer, the relatively short production time-some of the more complex compound medicines such as the plague and poison remedy Theriac required maturing over several months-had the further benefit of reducing the amount of circulating capital tied up at any one time and allowing speedy scaling of output to meet demand. in Daffy could, short, virtually produce to order, if he chose. Less constant than the method and base liquid was the precise detail of the other ingredients. The recipes normally list between eight and ten ingredients, mostly drugs imported from Asia and southern as Europe was normal in contemporary pharmacy, although one has the unusual of simplicity a mere four constituents. One ingredient was present in all but one of the recipes: senna, sometimes the leaves, sometimes the pods, which has a well-known laxative effect. Indeed, Daffy's Elixir was, to some, synonymous with a simple tincture of senna, and it was under this or a similar name that several recipes were printed. Beside senna and some variety of alcoholic spirit, however, no less than twenty-four different ingredients feature in at least one of the nineteen recipes compared here."17 Amidst this one does seems to range, recipe have been the most it is also the common; one recorded, with only a variation in the in the two weights, earliest recipes that have been found to date, in the manuscripts compiled by Elias Ashmole and in another manuscript collection begun in 1683.118 to this According recipe, Daffy's Elixir should contain three ounces of senna, elecam- pane root, liquorice root, aniseed, coriander seed, guaiacum wood, and a caraway seed, plus "4Wellcome Library, MS 7723, fol. 12v. "5 His was Mr Edward Smith: PROB supplier NA, 32/25/259-275. William Buchan, Domestic Strahan medicine, London, & Cadell, 1784, p. 755; 'Component parts of popular patent medicines', BL, MS Add. fol. 49r. 34722, 17Bodleian Library, Ashmole, MS 1463, fol. 23; Ripley Castle, Yorkshire, MS Elizabeth Eden, 1683, transcript kindly supplied by Layinka Swinbume; of MS University Pennsylvania, Codex 624 (c. 1705); BL, MS Add. 27466, fol. 297 (Mary Doggett's recipe collection, 1682-); John Quincy, Pharmacopoeia officinalis extemporanea: or a compleat English dispensatory, A T et London, Bell, Varman, al., 1718, p. of 394; Royal College Physicians of London, op. cit., note 113 of of above, p. 27; Royal College Physicians note Edinburgh, op. cit., 113 above, p. 53; Eliza Smith, The J compleat housewife, London, Pemberton, 1728, p. 299; Elizabeth Cleland, A new and easy method of cookery, C Edinburgh, Wright, 1759, p. 216; Peregrine Montague, The family pocket-book, London, George Paul, 1762, Wellcome MS p. 136; Library, fol. 13r 7723, (eighteenth century); Weddell (ed.), op. cit., note 66 above; Buchan, op. note 116 cit., above; Lancet, 1826, i: General 24; Medical Council, The British Pharmacopoeia, London, Spottiswoode, 1898; Henry Beasley, The druggist's general receipt book, London, Churchill, 1850 (Beasley gives four recipes). "18Bodleian Library, Ashmole, MS 1463, fol. 23; Ripley Castle, MS Elizabeth 1683. Yorkshire, Eden, 31 Introduction pound of stoned raisins. These ingredients were then infused in three quarts of aqua the laxative vitae.119 It was an of and that must have array spices drugs compounded effect of the senna, while adding a sweetness and richness to the flavour of the drink, perhaps not dissimilar to a number of the distilled cordials, such as Benedictine and Chartreuse, that would later become popular as liqueurs rather than medicines. In addition to the two seventeenth-century manuscript recipe collections, this recipe-each time with different weights-was given by John Quincy in 1718, in the Lancet in 1826, as part of its series exposing the "composition of quack medicines", and in Henry Beasley's Druggist's general receipt book (1850), where it was described as the version used by the eighteenth- century manufacturers, Dicey & Co.120 Although this was the most common recipe, and may have been closest to the version on sale in the seventeenth century, several other competing recipes were in circulation. One, printed in a 1759 collection of cookery and household recipes, shared only the use of spirits, aniseed and caraway with the version just described. It relied instead on an array of different drugs: fennel seeds, hiera picra, snake root, aloes and orange peel.121 By the mid- nineteenth century, the differences between recipes had grown. Alongside Dicey's version, Beasley printed another three recipes for the Elixir: one he attributed to the other Swinton, two were anonymous. Such a plethora of alternatives led to further confusions. In for 1762, example, Peregrine Montague suggested that the medicine, although called "commonly Daffy's Elixir", was actually the work of Dr Lower.122 This gradual process of diffusion and variation to some extent also undermined the uniqueness of the Elixir and the value of its name. In his massively popular Domestic medicine, for example, William Buchan assured his readers in 1784 that the compound tincture of senna he described "answers all the purposes of the Elixir Salutis, and of Elixir", not bothering to offer a recipe Daffy's for the Elixir itself.'23 By 1812, the variety had become so great that the Patent Medicine Act employed the all-encompassing description of "Daffy's Elixir, by whomever made". 124 The uses of the Elixir also varied and changed over time. In the 1670s, Anthony Daffy advised its use against an extensive, almost arbitrary-seeming as can be range of ailments, seen from the pamphlet printed below. As Andrew Wear has he combined the noted, traditional "cultural and theoretical signposts of such as seventeenth-century medicine", God, experience and temperament, with the promise of a powerful, universal nostrum.125 Little attention was paid to the individualized therapeutic approach of Galenic medicine. Not only was the Elixir good for the gout, it was effective against the stone and in gravel "9The weights given here are those in Bodleian Library, Ashmole, MS 1463, fol. 23. 120Quincy, op. cit., note 117 above; Lancet, op. cit., note 117 above; Beasley, op. cit., note 117 above. A full bottle of Dicey's version of Daffy's Elixir was of the excavated in the 1940s. A chemical analysis contents suggested it was "an alcoholic extract of some drug or drugs with laxative properties, and one of these drugs was probably senna": I A Richmond and G Webster, 'Excavations in Goss Street, Chester, 1948-9', Journal of the Chester Archaeological Society, 1951, p. 36. op. cit., note 117 above, p. 216. 121Cleland, 122 Montague, op. cit., note 117 above, p. 136. op. cit., note 116 above, p. 755. 123Buchan, Statutes at large, 1812. Wear, 'Medical 125Andrew practice in late seventeenth- and early eighteenth-century England: continuity and union', in R French and A Wear (eds), The medical revolution of the seventeenth century, Cambridge University Press, 1989, pp. 294-320, on p. 316. 32 Introduction the reins, ulceration in the kidneys or mouth of the bladder, languishing and melancholy, shortness of breath, colic, griping in the guts, the ptissic (phthisis, or pulmonary consump- tion), green-sickness, surfeits, scurvy and dropsy, coughs, wheezings, consumptions and agues, mother and spleen, fits of the mother, and rickets. Indeed, Daffy asserted that "There is not one Disease able to withstand, but is through God's blessing subject unto my Drink's innocent, powerful, and miraculous operation (God's appointed time for the Patient's Dissolution being not 126 come)." For many of these conditions, Daffy could even claim the testimonial of a patient successfully healed with the help of his medicine. So, Benjamin Hope of Camberwell in Surrey (who also appears in the Account Book [94A]) had been cured of the gout, while William Crawley of Luton had "voided above a Hundred Stones" with the help of the Elixir. Admittedly, no testimonials appeared attesting to its powers against greensickness or fits of the mother, but this probably reflected a concern that such embarrassing, sexually-related disorders should be kept from the public eye rather than a limit in the application of the Elixir. The powers that Daffy attributed to the Elixir are somewhat greater than the compilers of later recipe collections generally claimed. None the less, the apparent efficacy of the Elixir continued to be recognized. Several of the popular printed recipe collections from the mid- eighteenth century took a modest view of its uses, recommending it for colic and little else; indeed, it was as a "Chollick" treatment that it was known to the Mordaunt family in Warwickshire in 171 1.127 Like all proprietary medicines, the Elixir had some harsh critics. In 1699 the physician Gideon Harvey warned against the dangers of it and "the like empirical Medicines ... since not a few have been thrown into mortal Diseases by the use of them."'128 Another critical opinion was expressed by John Quincy, who in 1718 considered it "but a very ordinary Medicine". Describing Daffy as "a poor Shoe-maker, or some such Mechanick", Quincy attributed its success to its combination of alcohol and laxative: "at the same time a Person is taking a Dose of Physick, he has all the Gratification of a Cordial Dram ... which is a sufficient Recommendation with common 129 People". Yet in many quarters there was still a sense that the Elixir was an "innocent" or "gentle" medicine which could be resorted to usefully in a variety of conditions. Even when authors attacked the evil of proprietary medicines and the arrant puffery that surrounded them, they often admitted that Daffy's Elixir "may in many instances be administered with advan- tage", as Hugh Smythson put it in 178 1.130 Despite his general to the hostility Elixir, Quincy took a broadly similar line, acknowledging that in a case of the colic "it is well enough fitted to break away Flatulencies, which often occasion such Pains". The simplicity of the Elixir was no doubt a further attraction. Not only was it taken in small doses-two or three spoonfuls before bed and in the morning were normally recommended-it did not demand burdensome adjustments in everyday regimen. Even its effects were 126Daffy, 1673, 7-8, and 1675, p. 6, both cited in note 14 above. pp. 127 Montague, op. cit., note 117 above, p. 136; Cleland, op. cit., note 117 above, p. F 204; Spilsbury, The friendly physician, London, J Wilkie, 1773, p. 14; Elizabeth Hamilton, The Mordaunts: an eighteenth- century family, London, Heinemann, 1965, p. 79. 128 Gideon Harvey, The vanities of philosophy & physick, London, A Roper, R Basset, W Turner, 1699, p. 38 129Quincy, op. cit., note 117 above, p. 394. 130Hugh Smythson, Compleat family physician, London, Harrison, 1781, p. 650. 33 Introduction reasonable: "it purges gently: you need not keep the house", while several recipe collections emphasize that it "requires not much Care in Diet".13' Elixir is hard to How- What the purchasers of Daffy's thought of such claims discern. such as the ever, the Elixir did receive resounding praise from some of those who used it, In one of his became ill dissenting clergyman Adam Martindale. 1681, daughters severely with a cold, and despite the attentions of several physicians she grew ever sicker. As Martindale later recorded in his autobiography: That which seemed to doe her most was Elixir for it her much Lord good Salutis, gave ease, (my Delamer having bestowed upon her severall bottles that came immediately from Mr. Daffie himselfe) and it also made her cheerfull; but going forth and getting new cold, she went fast away. I am really perswaded that if she had taken it a little sooner in due quantities, and been carefull of herselfe, it might have saved her life. But it was not God's will.'32 It is notable that in this case, the Elixir taken by Martindale's daughter had come directly Delamer. It is an from Daffy, as the gift of the clergyman's great patron and employer, Lord the and indicate aside that suggests a residual concern for the authenticity of Elixir, may his medicine to the in an to further that Daffy was distributing aristocracy attempt garner testimonials or patronage.133 The limited evidence which survives of the uses that others made of the Elixir suggests that medical and of all kinds a similar faith in its worth. This many practitioners laymen put extended to the of Sir Richard the Hester Thrale's very top society. Jebb, physician treating in the Elixir his last illness.134 A little more dying son 1776 administered during painful than ten Horace had described how the sick Duke of Cumberland years earlier, Walpole had "found out that Elixir with and does him The Elixir Daffy's agrees [him], good."'135 also found its supporters in the face of some of the most dangerous diseases of the period. in was used as a During the yellow fever epidemic that savaged Philadelphia 1793, it such as prophylactic against the disease, along with more traditional preservatives vinegar in the sixteenth and seventeenth and wormwood, which had been popular against plague centuries. 36 It seems that it was in the nineteenth that the uses of the Elixir only century The with all other and became more restricted. remedy, along proprietary patent medicines, criticism from the medical from the 1820s onwards. came under sustained profession By the mid-nineteenth the Elixir had to from a cure for and the century, begun slip being gout stone to a for infants. In this it in the of the pacifier guise, appears repeatedly writing period. for featured it to infants several times in his novels. Thackeray, example, being given it is in that the of the medical to the Elixir Indeed, Vanityfair growing hostility profession note 117 Wellcome MS fol. note Quincy, op. cit., above, p. 394; Library, 7723, 13r; Smith, op. cit., 117 above, p. 299; Ripley Castle, Yorkshire, MS Elizabeth Eden, 1683. 132R Parkinson (ed.), The life ofAdam Martindale, written by himself, Chetham Society, 4, Manchester, 1845, p. 208. 133 was the In the ODNB, vol. 14, p. 893, this was assumed to be Thomas Daffy. Given that Anthony that it was he who Delamere. main producer at this time, it seems likely supplied Katharine C Balderston (ed.), Thraliana: the diary of Mrs Hester Lynch Thrale (later Mrs Piozzi), 1776-1809, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1942, p. 319. 35 ed. P 18 April 1765. The letters of Horace Walpole, Earl of Orford, vol. 4, 1762-1766, Cunningham, London, Henry G Bohn, 1861-66, p. 136 Elizabeth 1759 to Henry D Biddle (ed.), Extracts from the journal of Drinker, from 1807, A.D., J B for 28 1793. Philadelphia, Lippincott, 1889, entry Aug. 34 Introduction and its like is made most apparent. The Elixir plays a crucial part in the argument between Amelia and her mother. When Amelia catches her "surreptitiously administering" Daffy's Elixir to her infant son, she rebels and "flung the bottle crashing into the fire-place. 'I will not have baby poisoned, Mamma!' ... 'He shall not have any medicine but that which Mr. Pestler sends for him. He told me that Daffy's Elixir was 0137 poison.' As Amelia's comment suggests, such remedies were becoming increasingly controversial even in the nursery.138 Conclusion Poison the Elixir was not. But it was certainly a commodity with a controversial and complex history, as Anthony Daffy's Account Book and the legal papers that survive with it make clear. They also reveal how in the late seventeenth century, Anthony Daffy succeeded in commercializing Daffy's Elixir, taking a family recipe and making it the basis of a and thriving expanding manufacturing and distribution business that covered much of Britain and reached far beyond its shores. To achieve this, he spent much time and effort in developing a business network that would sustain the trade in a number of different countries. The comfortable existence and civic prominence as master of the Cordwainers' Company that it brought him is a good measure of his success, even if the fate of his business after his death was less straightforward. What does the Elixir Account Book tell us more generally about proprietary medicines and the business environment of late seventeenth-century England? Most obviously, Daffy's life was certainly not visibly marked by the marginal status that some have retrospectively assigned to proprietary medicine makers. As the scale of Daffy's distribu- tion network underlines, proprietary medicines were one of the clearest manifestations of London's near monopoly of specialist service industries within England. Nearly every prominent proprietary medicine was produced in London and distributed from there across the country.139 They also illustrate the growing confidence and success the of capital as a source of manufactured commodities for a broader international market at a time of expansion in trade. Daffy's export-orientation stands in contrast to the deference to imported medicines that was more general at the start of the century. The importance of personal sustained connections, by gifts and assistance, and the generous terms of trade 37 William Makepeace Thackeray, Vanity fair: a novel without a hero, Oxford University Press, 1983, p. 486; William Makepeace The works William Thackeray, of Makepeace Thackeray, with biographical introductions by his daughter, Anne Ritchie, vol. 4, The memoirs of Barry Lyndon, Esq., The Fitz-Boodle papers, Men's wives, Etc., London, Smith, Elder, 1899, p. 282. See also Pisistratus Caxton, [Edward Bulwer-Lytton], What will he do with it?, 2 vols, London, George and Routledge Sons, 1892, vol. 2, p. 115; Kirby Hare, 'That beast beauty', The Idler Magazine, 1893, 3: 13. 138 John See Bunnell Davis, A cursory inquiry into some the of principal causes of mortality among children, London, the author, 1817, 'caution V'. 139 One of the few exceptions, appears to have been the Bristol-based chemical practitioner whose "elixir proprietatis" was sold by, among others, John Kimbar of Bristol, who also sold Elixir: Daffy's BL, Sloane 3773, fol. 63r. Samuel Hartlib also records in his Ephemerides, 24 that an had January 1659, apothecary paid £100 for the recipe of a medicine produced by a man in Marlborough, Wiltshire, "who hath perfectly cured stone Gout Feavers and Agues ... it may bee bought there (the powder or and is sent over all liquor) the Nation". The Hartlib Papers The Online, Humanities Research Institute Online Press (www.hrionline.ac.uk). "Ephemerides, Anni. 1659", 29/8/lA. 35 Introduction to help his business expand are clear. In this, Daffy's enterprise under- that Daffy offered lines the significance of informal associations and the careful building of trust in early modem commerce. Given the close association between proprietary medicines and print that the survival of evidence has produced, it is also worth underlining that whilst Daffy's was a business that made great use of the press, it is not clear that the success of the Elixir was dependent upon it, as has been implied in some studies of proprietary medicines. Advertisements in this case appear to have come after the Elixir was already established. but it was far from Daffy's Elixir was a popular and successful proprietary medicine, and counterfeiters underline, his product unique. As Anthony Daffy's struggles with rivals in a market. His sat towards the upper end of the succeeded crowded enterprise probably in such a substantial network, but others, such as Lionel Lockyer, spectrum possessing perhaps even greater, levels of success than Daffy. That the appear to have attained similar, here was almost certainly only one small fragment of a extensive supply network revealed sector suggests that proprietary medicines formed a more significant aspect of much larger the medical world of the late seventeenth century than has generally been thought. The size, scale and structure of the proprietary medicine businesses that came before Daffy must remain an open question unless a similar source is discovered. Nevertheless, Anthony Daffy's Account Book reveals their importance in meeting the demands for medical in the late seventeenth commodities of a wide, international cross-section of society century. of 1640- cit., note 3 above, pp. 44-7; L H Curth, 'The medical content English almanacs, 14Porter, op. 150-1. See also 1700', PhD thesis, London University, 2001, pp. 240-6; Styles, op. cit., note 3 above, pp. 15: 112-30. R B Walker, 'Advertising in London newspapers, 1650-1750', Business History, 1973,
Medical History. Supplement – Pubmed Central
Published: Jan 1, 168
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.