Dr John Maubray (1700–1732) was one of the most prominent man-midwives of Georgian London. His emphasis on the importance of physical examination and a combination of theoretical and practical teaching seems to have foreshadowed later methods of training in midwifery. His espousal of the non-instrumental Deventerian system of obstetrics and his activities in the parish of St George's, Hanover Square in London, identified him with the dominant Whig party. Although he failed to acquire a major patron, his network of social connections enabled him to obtain charitable and public service appointments, culminating in his chairmanship of the Charitable Corporation.
References
1.
”Andro-boethogynist” was a description invented by Maubray, who regarded “man-midwife” as a contradiction in terms, but the term was not used in print by other writers.
2.
Maubray was born in 1700: see WallisPJWallisRV. Eighteenth Century Medics (Subscriptions, Licences, Apprenticeships) (2nd edn). Newcastle upon Tyne: Project for Historical Bibliography, 1988: p. 424. He invariably used the spelling Maubray, although most of his contemporaries preferred Mowbray.
3.
MullinsA. Profile of John Maubray. Father of midwifery teaching. History of Medicine1969;1:32–3.
4.
WilsonA. The Making of Man-Midwifery. Childbirth in England 1660–1770.London: UCL Press, 1995: p. 83.
5.
MaubrayJ. The Female Physician, Containing all the Diseases incident to that Sex … To which is added, The Whole Art of New improv'd Midwifery … together with the Diet and Regimen of both the Mother and Child. London: J Holland, 1724: p. 373.
6.
“Philalethes”, or a lover of truth and learning. The Sooterkin Dissected. In a letter to John Maubray, M.D. wherein it is clearly prov'd, I. That there never was such an Animal in the World. II. That God never made it. III. That the Devil cannot make it. IV. That it is Impudence to assert it. V. That it is Stupidity to believe it. VI. That it is a mere Fiction of his own Brain. VII. That it is contrary to the Opinion of the most learned Physicians and Philosophers in our Days, who maintain the Truth of Univocal Generation. London: A Moore, 1726.
7.
MaubrayJ (op. cit. ref. 5): p. 358.
8.
MaubrayJ (op. cit. ref. 5): p. xviii.
9.
MaubrayJ (op. cit. ref. 5): p. iv.
10.
See British Library (BL), MS Sloane 4047, fol. 284.
11.
See British Library (BL), MS Sloane 4047, fol. 284 fol. 297. Maubray later sent a copy of The Female Physician to Sloane, again apparently without response: see BL, MS Sloane 4059, fol. 321–2. The year began on 25 March, the Feast of the Annunciation, until the adoption of the Gregorian calendar in 1751.
12.
ClarkG. A History of the Royal College of Physicians of London. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1964: vol. II, p. 502. Maubray was never licensed as a physician in London: see Bloom JH, James RR. Medical Practitioners in the Diocese of London, Licensed under the Act of 3 Henry VIII, c. 11. An Annotated List 1529–1725. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1935.
13.
WilsonA (op. cit. ref. 4): p. 107.
14.
Maubray's arms included two children as supporters (Figure 2). The use of supporters, an obvious claim to nobility in a heraldically literate age, is a curious example of self-aggrandizement, perhaps intended to suggest a foreign title. Maubray's motto, Dum spiro spero, also appeared in The Female Physician — “As long as there is Life, there is Hope with me”.
15.
Statuta Solennia de Doctoratus in Mediana Gradu in Academia Edinburgena. Edinburgh: C Stewart, 1817: p. 8.
16.
All students matriculated or admitted to degrees were required to profess the Christian faith and take an oath of allegiance to the Pope.
17.
SmithRWIEnglish-Speaking Students of Medicine at the University of Leyden. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd, 1932; Harskamp J. Dissertatio Medica Inauguralis. London: Wellcome Trust, 1998.
18.
MaubrayJ (op. cit. ref. 5): pp. 129, 169. Nothing is known about these teachers from other sources.
In 1752: see Statuta Solennia (op. cit. ref. 15): p. 11.
21.
”Accipimus aurum, dimittimus asinum” was reputedly pronounced at graduation: see SmithRWI (op. cit. ref. 17): p. xv.
22.
”Accipimus aurum, dimittimus asinum” was reputedly pronounced at graduation: see SmithRWI (op. cit. ref. 17): p. xv.
23.
The last prosecution for unlicensed practice was in 1735: see ClarkG (op. cit. ref. 12): vol. II, p. 507. Arguably the practice of midwifery as opposed to “physic” was not within the purview of the College of Physicians and required only a licence from the Bishop of London (which Maubray did not possess), although this was not a route customarily followed by medical graduates.
24.
ClevelandJ. A Character of a Diurnal-Maker.London: William Sheares, 1654.
25.
SharpJ. The Midwives Book. Or the whole ART of Midwifry discovered. London: Simon Miller, 1671.
26.
SharpJ. The Midwives Book. Or the whole ART of Midwifry discovered. London: Simon Miller, 1671.
27.
Chapman was a practitioner and teacher of man-midwifery first at Halstead and then in London and author of A Treatise on the Improvement of Midwifery. London: J Brindley, 1735.
28.
ChapmanE. A Reply to Mr Douglass's Short Account of the State of MIDWIFERY in London and Westminster. London: T Cooper, 1737: p. 37.
29.
MaubrayJ. Midwifery Brought to Perfection by Manual Operation; Illustrated in a Lecture. London: James Holland, 1725: pp. 28–9.
30.
For an account of this celebrated case see: BondesonJ. A Cabinet of Medical Curiosities. London: I B Tauris, 1997: pp. 122–43.
31.
A contemporary pamphlet described Maubray as the “squab” (i.e., inexperienced person) who cried out “a sooterkin, a sooterkin”. See SpencerHR. The History of British Midwifery from 1650 to 1800.London: John Bale, 1927: p. 15.
32.
ManninghamR. An Exact Diary of what was observed during a Close Attendance upon Mary Toft, the pretended Rabbet-Breeder of Godalming in Surrey, from Monday Nov. 28, to Wednesday Dec. 7 following. Together with an Account of her Confession of the Fraud (2nd edn). London: Hetcher Gyles, 1726: p. 24.
33.
ManninghamR. An Exact Diary of what was observed during a Close Attendance upon Mary Toft, the pretended Rabbet-Breeder of Godalming in Surrey, from Monday Nov. 28, to Wednesday Dec. 7 following. Together with an Account of her Confession of the Fraud (2nd edn). London: Hetcher Gyles, 1726: p. 32.
34.
WilsonA (op. cit. ref. 4): pp. 83, 86.
35.
MaubrayJ (op. cit. ref. 29): pp. 28–9.
36.
MaubrayJ (op. cit. ref. 5): p. 222.
37.
See ClarkG (op. cit. ref. 12): vol. II, p. 501.
38.
MaubrayJ (op. cit. ref. 29): pp. 40–1.
39.
MaubrayJ (op. cit. ref. 29): p. 26.
40.
MaubrayJ (op. cit. ref. 29): p. iii.
41.
St George's Hanover Square Common Book of Vestry Orders, 1725: n.p.; and 1727: p. 118. City of Westminster Archives Centre (CWAC), microfilm roll 532, item 13.
42.
Anonymous. A Short History of the Charitable Corporation. From the Date of their Charter, to their late Petition. In which is contain'd a Succinct History of the Frauds discovered in the Management of their Affairs, which occasion'd the Proprietors Application to Parliament; the Nature of the Trust reposed in Directors is accurately examined, and the Reasonableness of their making Satisfaction for Male-Administration, fully proved. Addressed to the Publick Companies in Britain. London: A Millar, 1732: p. 6.
43.
Gentleman's Magazine1732;2: 578–9.
44.
Gentleman's Magazine1732;2: p. 627.
45.
Gentleman's Magazine1732;2: pp. 767, 773, 783.
46.
Gentleman's Magazine1732;2: p. 1031.
47.
Minutes of the vestry meeting, 15 February 1732. CWAC, microfilm roll 532, item 13. The dates are old style, that is based on the Gregorian calendar.
