Corydon
L. Ford, M.D.
Click on image to enlarge
Go to lecture card display
Name: Corydon L. Ford
Cause of death: apoplexy
Death date: Apr 14, 1894
Place of death: Ann Arbor, MI
Birth date: Aug 29, 1813
Place of birth: Lexington, NY
Type of practice: Allopath
Medical school(s): Geneva Medical College, Geneva: Syracuse
University College of Medicine, (G)
Journal of the American Medical Association Citation: 22:601 |
Corydon L. Ford, that gifted
teacher of anatomy, is no more. He finished his one hundred and ninth
course of lectures on April 4, 1894, the same date that his life-work
and his life with us ended. Born and reared in some little unknown
village in the State of New York, the beginning of his life was as
obscure and common-place as that of Abraham Lincoln, whom he resembled
in some of his rugged, strongly-marked and picturesque features. The
impression at this time is that lie obtained his education at the public
school, and may have had some aid in a higher grade of study, but he
never had a collegiate training. At an early age he taught in a public
school, but only for a short time, and then entered upon the study of
medicine. With but little preliminary training he made great progress by
his own gifts, energy, perseverance and Iteroie effort?. As soon as he
graduated he began to teach anatomy in some subordinate position, and in
a little while rose above his associates and took first place.
"The greatest teacher of anatomy," he has often been called, and I
believe he was the greatest that this world ever saw. To live, to act,
to die as this man did is as full and complete a record as the human
heart desires. Men there may have been who knew more about general
anatomy; some made more discoveries in this branch of science, but^few,
if any, equaled him in his knowledge of human anatomy, and none came
near to him as a teacher. Ford stood alone, far above all others, in his
capacity.as professor of anatomy, gifted far beyond compare with that
rare power to impart knowledge. lie was ever on a higher plane than his
contemporaries. He took this position, too, in spite of many
disadvantages. As already stated, his early education was far from being
as complete and comprehensive as is now deemed necessary to fit a man
for the profession of medicine, yet he did preeminently that for which
many Americans have been noted, namely, superb scientific professional
work without a full preliminary training. He began to teach anatomy
early in life, and without a break lie continued his work for nearly
sixty years. A slight physical defect (the only one in his whole being)
made him lame; this disqualified him for the practice of mi-dicine and
surgery to any great extent, but happily anchored him to the study of
science and teaching. This no doubt had much to do with determining his
course of life and in making his career, now closed, so thorough and
well rounded out. This weakness of one limb was far more than
compensated for by extraordinary health and strength, mental and
physical.
His knowledge of anatomy was most extraordinary and was gained at first
with a little help from books and teachers, and then all the rest was
obtained by his study of nature. He did not go to the library to
investigate or refresh his memory, but to the living structures in the
woods, fields, highways and byways, and to practical investigations in
the laboratory of practical anatomy. He was a pioneer in this method of
study, for I believe he preceded Agassiz who founded the great school of
practical observation and study of zoology from nature. He was also a
pioneer in his teaching by object lessons and demonstration. His
knowledge of the great principles of his subject was most thorough, and
in every detail complete and familiar as the alphabet of his mother
tongue; so much so that he was able to accurately express himself
without effort or hesitation. He was in this respect like the choir of
the forest whose heads and hearts are full, and overflow in melodious
song.
His knowledge and love of anatomy and his enthusiasm, which never
slumbered, were the basis of his strength. His method of teaching, the
Socratic, was by raising questions and answering them. This method he
matured to the highest degree. His ability to excite interest in
students and keep them interested was wonderful. Anatomy was the " pons
asinorum" of medical students until Ford made it as fascinating as
poetry or fiction. So plain, simple and interesting were his lectures
that a layman who knew nothing of the great science of organization
would listen to him by the hour with pleasure and profit.
Not being engaged in the actual practice of medicine or surgery one
would naturally expect that his teaching would have been impractical,
that lie would deal more with the science of anatomy than with its
practical utility, but here he surprised every one who ever listened to
him by teaching physiology and surgical anatomy most impressively. A few
words regarding what any structure that he had described was " good
for," very briefly but fully taught physiology, and in his descriptive
anatomy he invariably added to the interest of his demonstrations by
showing how convenient it was for the operator to know about the
relation of things. " What is it good for? " " What is the use of it? "
were questions which he continually raised, and answered them briefly,
practically, and in a way never to be forgotten by the physiologist or
surgeon. He would often say, " You may have occasion while operating to
look for this artery, here it is; what is in front of it? look and see,
here it is. What is behind it? on the right of it? on the left of it?"
To each question came the answer, "You can see it right there."
Thirty years ago I attended his lectures and demonstrations, and many of
the practical and useful things in anatomy then presented remain as
clearly in mind to-day as when they were at first impressed. I have
heard him lecture daily for months without hesitating a moment for the
plainest and most effective of words to express bis ideas, and without
once using the personal pronoun, I. He was not only, then, the greatest
teacher of descriptive anatomy, but of surgical anatomy, and of
physiology; and this was done without any apparent effort. It may be
truly said that one learned anatomy from Ford without the consciousness
of being taught. Anatomical lectures and anatomy as a study have always
been considered dry, difficult and uninteresting, and the great majority
of students dread them, and are glad to be through with them.
As a man, Professor Ford was clear-headed, kind-hearted,'pure-minded. He
lived a life of seclusion, knowing nothing of the so-called pleasures of
life. It is doubtful if he was ever in a place of amusement during his
life, but he was quite entertained in his work with his students,
associates and friends in college. Plain, simple and severely correct in
all his habits, his wants were easily supplied, and by setting a limit
to his desires he was able to gratify them all with little means. While
Professor Goodsir was receiving ten or fifteen thousand dollars for
teaching anatomy in Europe, Professor Ford in this country was receiving
little more than fifteen hundred^ Strange it is that in this country the
people will give thousands of dollars to a prima donna for singing a
song while college professors labor for the wages of a ploughman. It is
more wonderful that men like Ford can be found who love science,
learning and humanity enough to serve without gold.
He gained the respect of everyone who came in contact with him, and this
respect grew to profound admiration. He associated always and intimately
with students, and the nearer they came to him the more they felt his
strength and goodness. There was no cold atmosphere of assumed dignity
put on to conceal weakness. He was pure, manly and strong enough to be
always transparent while with his students, so that the more they knew
of him the more they found to admire, and the surer they felt that there
was no weakness that he had to conceal. The wildest boys in his class
became gentle and respectful, quiet and attentive, the moment he looked
at them. He was the gentle shepherd that led his flock with tender care.
He was unassuming, retiring, gentle—almost timid—and in his manner, in
this respect, he seemed to possess the disposition of the refined woman,
yet withal he was one of the bravest men that one could meet. In the
session of 1861-2, his associate, Professor Gunn, that remarkable
surgeon, was serving the country as a military surgeon, and Professor
Ford in addition to his lectures on anatomy took up the work of his
absent associate, and then we had occasion to see him operate, and this
he did with an accuracy and firmness of touch which led one to believe
he was wholly unconscious of the term " nervous " as commonly used. One
of his students, at the time, who had a fancy for surgery, but was
fearful that he would not be able to practice that branch of medicine
because of his tender-heartedness, learned from Ford that the tender are
the bravest. This student had the impression, which was popular then,
and is probably so at the present time, that a surgeon must be
hard-hearted and unfeeling in order to be able to do major surgical
operations; but an incident in the life of Ford taught him the truth on
this subject. A few days after seeing the professor calmly and coolly do
a very important operation in the amphitheater, the student had occasion
to sit beside him at a public meeting where the speaker told an
exceedingly interesting but pathetic story,, and at the conclusion of
the narrative when he turned to look at the master he found that ideal
anatomist and surgeon with tears flowing as freely as they ever did from
the eyes of the most affectionate mother or maid.
I have an idea also that he was a man of profound religious feeling. I
kiiow lot and care not what his creed was, but he impressed me as a man
who adored he good, the right, the true, omnipotent and benevolent; that
the Being with these attributes was tlie God that lie worshiped and the
diety whom he saw through his works and whom lie aimed to serve in all
things. Solid as a rock which long resists the elements, he remained
young far into the afternoon of life. At three-score and ten as active
as at forty, with abundant hair, without a silver thread noticeable in
it; when nearing four-score' there was a little more repose, a little
less fire in his lecture, more time in the easy chair after the chief
work of the day was done, less time in the museum and laboratory, but no
signs of decline such as are usually visible in the aged. The night came
to him, as it comes in his own country, after a very brief twilight.
The influence which Professor Ford exerted upon the profession of this
age can be thought of but cannot lie computed: He was not the physician
and surgeon who serves his fellow-men in a way which brings admiration
and endless loving memories of his goodness and value. Works of such
good men are seen and appreciated, and when they have finished their
life-work we can estimate them by comparison with other great men in the
profession who have come and gone; but I contend that the influence for
good exercised by Professor Ford in his long career was as great, or
greater than any in the profession, although unseen by the vast majority
of mankind. He taught anatomy when there was so little time for it that
there would have been but few anatomists sufficiently qualified in this
branch of medicine to be either good physicians or surgeons. He taught
more and in less time than any other man could do. How many physicians
and surgeons are there in this and other countries who owe their success
to the grand work done for them by Ford? He certainly laid the
foundation upon which it was possible to build an education which could
secure success. He robbed anatomy of all that was unattractive or
repugnant in the study, and made it a living, pure, attractive and
useful knowledge.
Another way in which he rendered the profession a service which should
keep his memory ever present and ever young was, that he made teachers
of other men. Many of those who are teaching the various branches of
medicine to-day owe much of their success to the fact that he,
unconsciously, perhaps, on his part or the part of his students, taught
them how to teach others. On one occasion he complimented a young
teacher (who had been his pupil) upon his success. The youthful doctor
thanked his old master and added, "It comes naturally; I have the
teaching diathesis, caught from Professor Ford when I was a boy." He did
much to make good, honest, faithful men; he excited interest and induced
students to study, and to study thoroughly and faithfully, and imparted
to others the power to teach, to a degree that few if any have equaled;
<ind altogether his influence on the profession in America is perhaps
greater
and more lasting than that of any who went before him to the " pule
realms." In looking back to early days, the pleasantest and most
profitable in one's student'* life began while with Ford, and the
impressions then made stand out as a guiding star and beacon light,
shining even now and telling that his influence still lives and will
live after him.—A. J. C. Skene, M. D., in The Brooklyn Medical Journal.
______________
Moses Gunn
was elected dean for the 1858-1859 academic year. Gunn was born in New
York in 1822, and in 1844 he attended the Geneva Medical College in New
York. There he was mentored by Professor of Anatomy Corydon L. Ford, who
eventually succeeded him as dean at Michigan. Ford remained at Geneva to
teach, but the ambitious young Gunn left for Ann Arbor after graduating
in 1846. Just prior to his departure, Geneva College received a cadaver,
an unclaimed body from the Auburn State Prison. Since it arrived too
late to be used in class, the body was given to Gunn for teaching
purposes. He brought the cadaver with him to Ann Arbor and performed a
dissection in front of guests. This was the first such demonstration in
Ann Arbor, and possibly all of Michigan. His series of lectures were so
well attended and successful that in the fall of 1846 Gunn taught
anatomy at a private medical school in Ann Arbor. Gunn and Silas Douglas
started the school while waiting for a Medical Department to be created
at the University of Michigan.
After the regents made their decision to found
the Medical Department, Gunn was appointed as the third faculty member
at the University of Michigan. At Pitcher’s recommendation, he was made
professor of anatomy and surgery in 1849 at age 27. Gunn’s research at
Michigan included an investigation of which particular tissues cause hip
and shoulder joint dislocations. He worked on a method of guiding these
dislocated parts back into position by gently directing the bone back
through its course of escape from the socket. Gunn’s results were
published in the Peninsular Medical Journal.
Though Gunn initiated a tradition of excellent
anatomy instruction at Michigan, he was also interested in surgery. A
capable, determined man, Gunn became professor of surgery in 1854,
holding the title until 1867, when it was taken over by his long time
friend and colleague Corydon Ford. Gunn served as a surgeon for 11
months in the Civil War, seeing active duty during General McClellan’s
peninsular campaign. Gunn resigned from the University in 1867 after the
sudden death of his son by drowning, and moved to Chicago with his
family. There he became chair of surgery at Rush Medical College until
he died in 1887. C.B.G. de Nancrede wrote of Dr. Gunn that:
Altogether he presented an impressive
figure of a man of physical and mental power, of one who must
investigate everything presented to his senses, who quickly
observed, classified his impressions, deciding upon the respective
merits and proper relation even of passing events, a man of an alert
and enthusiastic temperament, ready and eager to digest new ideas,
yet one whose judgment restrained his zeal within due bounds… A man
thus opulently endowed by nature and trained by a life of continuous
effort to excel, could not fail to command at the very outset the
attention and confidence of any audience, and to exert an actively
compelling influence over them. [Nancrede, C.B.G. de. “Moses
Gunn, A.M., M.D., LL.D.” Michigan Alumnus 12 (1905-06):
364-374].
Gunn’s friendship with Corydon L. Ford proved
to be an asset for the University. Like Gunn, Ford earned such respect
and distinction in the Department that he was elected dean in 1861, and
returned to the post from 1879-1880 and 1887-1891. Ford earned his M.D.
from the Geneva Medical College in 1842, where he then taught anatomy
from 1842-1848. He came from a family of farmers, but paralysis of one
leg as a child made it impossible for him to pursue this vocation. He
used a cane the rest of his life, and had he not been dealt this
setback, he most likely would have followed his family’s line of work in
farming. This would have, as Alonzo Palmer wrote in 1886, deprived “the
profession of medicine and the science of anatomy in this country of
what many have reason to believe its most successful teacher.” Ford
began teaching at the age of 17, and in 1834 he started studying
medicine in the office of Dr. A.B. Brown of Niagara County, New York. It
has been said that Ford’s disability and illness caused him to view the
darker side of life, but he was nonetheless compassionate, approachable,
and kind.
Ford was greatly respected and admired by his
students and colleagues. By the time he was appointed to the chair of
anatomy at the University of Michigan in 1854, he was known as an
excellent teacher at several institutions. He was described as “an
eloquent teacher, able to infuse life within dry bones.” Considered a
great lecturer and demonstrator, he was one of the students’ favorite
teachers. He had a high skill in dissecting, an ability to make a clear
and concise presentation of the material, and an enthusiastic demeanor.
Dr. William Mayo, a Michigan alumnus and student of Dr. Ford, said
By his forceful personality and his intense
love of his subject he made the too often dull study of general anatomy
as interesting as a novel. Contrary to custom, Ford preferred to make
his own dissections while he talked, and he did them beautifully and
rapidly. When he had finished one he would swivel the table around
toward the class with a flourish, pointing upward with his cane to
emphasize his words, “Now gentlemen, forget that—if you can.” (Clapsattle,
Helen: “The Doctors Mayo,” Atlantic Monthly 68:645-47, 1941)
Aside from teaching, Ford wrote several
significant works including “Questions on Anatomy, Histology, and
Physiology, for the Use of Students” (last ed. Ann Arbor, 1878),
“Syllabus of Lectures on Odontology, Human and Comparative (1884), and
“Questions on the Structure and Development of the Human Teeth” (1885).
Dr. Ford was given a LL.D. from Michigan in 1881. After giving his last
lecture in 1894, he turned wearily to an assistant and said, “My work is
done.” He collapsed on his way home, and died the next morning.
(The personal edited research
notes of Michael Echols, the source of which may or
may not be completely documented)
