Introduction: Hugh H. Young (1870-1945) is considered by many to be a founding father of American Urology. He waged a war throughout his career on behalf of Crawford W. Long, proclaiming Long as the discoverer of anesthesia. As a young assistant resident surgeon at Johns Hopkins he presented a detailed account of Long’s discovery of anesthesia. Methods: For our investigation we used the Alan Mason Chesney Medical Archives, along with Dr. Young’s original presentation before the Johns Hopkins Hospital Historical Society on the evening of November 8, 1896. Ultimately leading to the pursuit of the wars of discovery and demonstration of general anesthesia itself. Results: Young was never a Southern apologist, and his pursuit of his passions characterized his long and distinguished career as the Founding Father of the Journal of Urology and the Johns Hopkins Urology program. In 1897, while still a surgical resident himself, Young presented a paper titled, “Long, the discoverer of anesthesia. His original documents” to a history group originated by William Osler. Conclusions: It is claimed by Dr. Young had met the daughter of Crawford Long, Mrs. Fanny Long Taylor who had kept his original documents. These documents show that Dr. Long first administered sulfuric ether to a patient for neck surgery in 1852, almost 2 ½ years prior to Wells of Harford’s discovery and later William Morton’s administration in Boston on October 16, 1846. He claimed that Long simply wanted no laurels, just some credit for pursuing this work as well. Young would become a vociferous defender of Long’s claim throughout his professional career. Young during his paper referred to the warfare over anesthesia as “The famed ether controversy.” This was enacted when Morton petitioned Congress for a reward (30th Congress, 2d Session, No. 114) for his discovery in 1849. Osler would eventually wade into this conflict from his retirement job as Regius Professor at Oxford. In later years when he addressed the Royal Society of Medicine on May 15, 1918, he would state that it is not the discoverer who is worthy of credit, but the one who brought it into practice so that the knowledge could be understood, learned, taught, and applied by others. He concludes as only Osler could summarizing the historical literature thus- “You remember the rings of Lucretius- well, there is a vis et vincula liborum, binding together books, a force just as potent as the Vis et vincula lapidist, which supports the rings, and in the literature of anaesthesia this force is derived from the works here presented to the Library.” SOURCE OF Funding: None
