In London, whether it arose from a neglect of using the precautions for too long a time, or from any other cause, cannot well be known; but the attempts of the magistrates to separate the sick from the sound certainly were not attended with any good consequence. “The consternation (says Dr. Hodges) of those who were thus separated from all society, unless of the infected, was inexpressible, and the dismal apprehensions it laid them under made them but an easier prey to the devouring enemy. And this seclusion was on this account much the more intolerable, because, if a fresh person was seized in the same house but a day before another had finished the quarantine, it was to be performed over again; which occasioned such tedious confinements of sick and well together, as sometimes caused the loss of the whole. Moreover, this shutting up of infected houses made the neighbours fly from theirs, who might otherwise have been a help to them on many accounts; and I verily believe that many who were lost might have been alive, had not the tragical mark upon their doors driven proper assistance from them. And this is confirmed by the examples of other pestilential contagions, which have been observed not to cease until the doors of the sick were set open, and they had the privilege of going abroad.” The Doctor sets forth also the arguments on the other side; but whatever _might_ have been the advantages of a separation of the sick from the healthy, if conducted in a manner less capable of hurting the feelings of humanity, it is evident that in the London plague the methods attempted to prevent the disease at least did no good.