The correspondence relating to the Lancet Sanitary Commission : (which appeared lately in The Times) / examined by James Caesar Durnford, John A. Power and Raymond S. Daniell ; with an appendix of documents.

  • Durnford, James Caesar.
Date:
1856
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: The correspondence relating to the Lancet Sanitary Commission : (which appeared lately in The Times) / examined by James Caesar Durnford, John A. Power and Raymond S. Daniell ; with an appendix of documents. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    13/64 (page 11)
    should have heard nothing of any attempt, to detract from his well-earned reputation, and to depreciate the value of his labours. So long as he was working unnoticed and unrewarded, bringing large profit to others with little ad- vantage to himself, he was welcome to do so; but no sooner is there a prospect of any credit or emolument accruing to him from his exertions, and especially when the importance of his labours is attracting the attention of Parliament, than forth- with a host of rival candidates for popular applause appear upon the field, and demands are loudly made for a division of the spoil. Hinc illce lacrymce. This suggestion may serve to explain what Dr. Hassall (Letter to the Times, July 30th) justly notices as a remarkable fact, that although the proof sheets of part of his book on the adulteration of food * went through Dr. Letheby’s hands, and that up to within a very few days of his letter in the Times he was in the habit of occasional friendly communication with him, no word of discontent or dissatisfaction was ever expressed by him to Dr. Hassall. If any confirmation were required of this fact, we have it in the confession of Dr. Letheby himself. In his letter to the Medical Times■ of August 1st, he says: — “ I did not at the time attach any value to such paltry sacrifices [viz. the analyses which Dr. Hassall employed him to make, and for which he was paid at a much higher rate than Dr. Hassall himself] : I thought I was doing him a service, and that was enough for me; but when he writes to me and asks me to have a private meeting of a few friends at his house, to talk over the subject of getting up a testimonial to him [which is not, however, a correct representation of the facts], I then become annoyed, and see the mischief which my libe- rality had occasioned.” This acknowledgment of Dr. Letheby has certainly the merit of great candour. Verily it was not without reason Dr. Letheby cautioned Dr. Hassall against the danger of awakening professional jealousy. Dr. Letheby, it is to be supposed, had good grounds for reminding Dr. Hassall how much envy and * The Reports themselves Dr. Letheby never even saw until their publica- tion in the Lancet.