Correspondence and statements regarding the teaching of clinical medicine in the University of Edinburgh, 1855-1857 : with a sequel / by T. Laycock.
- Thomas Laycock
- Date:
- 1857
Licence: Public Domain Mark
Credit: Correspondence and statements regarding the teaching of clinical medicine in the University of Edinburgh, 1855-1857 : with a sequel / by T. Laycock. Source: Wellcome Collection.
35/70 page 35
![EXAMINATION of the Published Letter^’ of Dr. Bennett to the Patrons, and of the Published “ Report by the Faculty,” by Dr. Christison. In the letter which Dr. Bennett has addressed to the Patrons, an appendix, is attached, containing amongst other documents a paper entitled Report by the Medical Faculty relative to the Teaching of Clinical Medicine,’’ signed “ J. H. Balfour, Dean,” sub¬ mitted to the Senatus on 7th November 1857. This document is in the handwriting of Dr. Christison, and he is known to be the author of it. No notice was given in the billet of the meeting that a document of such grave import to the interests of the Univer¬ sity, or to the good fame of a colleague, would be submitted to the Senatus, and thus no opportunity was given for correcting the many erroneous statements embodied in it. It is essential to a right under¬ standing of the whole matter, and to the interests of truth, that these errors should be corrected, as well as those of a like character in Dr. Bennett’s letter. I propose, therefore, to analyse these two documents. The salient points in these documents are denials of the truth of the statements made in my letter to the Patrons of the 5th November, as to the proceedings of the Medical Faculty, and which, as will be seen on reference to that document, were distinct and positive. Dr. Bennett affirms that they are “ wholly incorrect and inconsistent with facts, as may be easily proved.” Dr. Christison uses equally strong language. In his “ Report by the Faculty” he says, “ In his [Dr. Laycock’s] memorial to the Patrons, the facts of the case have been greatly misrepresented.” “ The Patrons, v/ithout hearing the other side of the question, and acting upon an entire mis-statement of it, have reversed,” etc. More specifically, my two colleagues deny the following allegations I made, namely :— 1. That the Medical Faculty had resolved to change the old method of service and teaching at the Infirmary, and by so doing deprived me of certain specified emoluments and privileges.](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b30563240_0035.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
