It would be endless to enumerate the accounts furnished by history of the losses and disappointments to the public service from the prevalence of disease in fleets. Sir Richard Hawkins, who lived in the beginning of the last century, mentions, that in twenty years he had known of ten thousand men who had perished by the scurvy. Commodore Anson, in the course of his voyage of circumnavigation, lost more than four fifths of his men chiefly by that disease. History supplies us with many instances of naval expeditions that have been entirely frustrated by the force of disease alone: that under Count Mansfeldt in 1624; that under the Duke of Buckingham the year after; that under Sir Francis Wheeler in 1693; that to Carthagena in 1741; that of the French under D’Anville in 1746; and that of the same nation to Louisbourg in 1757[36]. That the health of a ship’s company depends in a great measure upon means within our power, is strongly evinced by this, that different ships in the same situation of service enjoy very different degrees of health. Every one who has served in a great fleet must have remarked, that out of ships with the same complement of men, who have been the same length of time at sea, and have been victualled and watered in the same manner, some are extremely sickly, while others are free from disease. Is it not naturally to be inferred from hence, that the health of men at sea depends in a great measure upon circumstances within the power of officers, and, indeed, upon their exertions, much more than medical care[37]?