Report of the Committee of the London Infirmary for Curing Diseases of the Eye, occasioned by the false and caluminous statements contained in a letter addressed by Sir William Adams to the Right Honourable and Honourable the Directors of Greenwich Hospital.

  • London Infirmary for Curing Diseases of the Eye
Date:
1818
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Report of the Committee of the London Infirmary for Curing Diseases of the Eye, occasioned by the false and caluminous statements contained in a letter addressed by Sir William Adams to the Right Honourable and Honourable the Directors of Greenwich Hospital. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The University of Glasgow Library. The original may be consulted at The University of Glasgow Library.

    37/112 (page 35)
    vowed all intention of reflecting blame on the gentlemen who rescinded the grant: a second amendment was then moved, namely, that the meeting should proceed to the current business of the day, which amendment was carried on a division of upwards of 70 to 7.* The minutes of the preceding Annual Meeting, by which the minutes of the General Committee of the 2d September, 1812, had been confirmed, were then read and confirmed. See Ap- pendix [E]. Sir William Adams, five years after the revo^ cation of the grant of annuity, and more than three years after the full and final confirmation of the proceedings of the General Committee, has revived this train of refuted assertion; he has stated that the annuity was for and during her natural life,—he has suppressed the con- trolling words of the resolution—he has re-pub- lished the whole of Mrs. Colkett's letter, not only without correcting the mis-statements Avhich * At the latter part of these proceedings, a person who at- tended as the avowed supporter of Mrs. Colkett's claim, pro- duced a paper, purporting to be a copy of the resolution by which the annuity was granted, in which, as well as in Mrs. Colkett's circular, the words,' under the direction of the Com- mittee,' were omitted.—In answer to a question why these re* strictive or controlling words were omitted, it was replied, that it was not thought necessary to notice them !