An early lay opponent of tea-drinking was John Wesley. He tells us that when he first went to Oxford with an exceedingly good constitution “he was somewhat surprised at certain symptoms of a paralytic disorder.” His hand shook especially after breakfast, and he observed that if he gave up tea-drinking for two or three days, the shaking ceased. On inquiry he found that tea had the same effect on others, and particularly on persons whose nerves were weak. This led him to lessen the quantity and to drink weaker tea, but still for about 26 years he was more or less subject to the same disorder. In 1746 he began to observe that a number of people in London were similarly affected, some suffering from the nerves with decay of bodily strength, and he asked them if they were hard drinkers, and learnt in reply that they drank nothing but a little tea, morning and evening. He came to the conclusion that they suffered from the effects of tea like he had himself. Wesley thought he should set an example and broke himself of a practice which had lasted for 27 years. The first three days he suffered from headache more or less all day long, and was half asleep from morning to night; on the third day his memory failed but the symptoms abated in the following day and his memory returned. He felt great benefit from the abstinence, and found that his hand was as steady at 45 as it had been at fifteen. One of the most determined opponents of tea-drinking in the 18th century was Jonas Hanway, the eminent philanthropist and “father” of Sunday schools. His views may be gathered from the title of his work.[14] Owing to the results of this beverage he said “men seem to have lost their stature and comeliness; and women their beauty ... what Shakespeare ascribes to the concealment of love, is _in this age_, more frequently occasioned by the use of _tea_.... I am persuaded the inhabitants of this island will never increase in number nor enjoy a blooming health whilst they continue such an extravagant use of tea.” Hanway’s exaggerations succeeded in drawing Dr. Johnson into the controversy. The great man in a review of Hanway’s work said “he is to expect little justice from the author of this extract, a hardened and shameless tea-drinker who has for twenty years diluted his meals with only the infusion of this facinating plant, whose kettle has scarcely time to cool, who with tea amuses the evening, with tea solaces the midnights, and with tea welcomes the morning.”[15]