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.
55/70 page 55
![three Professors heard at full length. The result of this second con¬ ference was a confirmation of the report agreed on at the close of the first conference. The Committee were of opinion that the arrange¬ ments of the Medical Faculty of April 9th, were those by which the current session should have been conducted (see my Letter, p. 30, and Protest, p. 32, § 4). As, however. Dr. Bennett had conducted the winter course pending the result of the appeal, he was to be allowed to conclude it, and I was to take the spring trimestre, together with the entire summer course. On Thursday, December 15th, the College Committee reported accordingly to the Town Council, and their report was unanimously adopted. In this way all my claims were granted. The letters of my three colleagues, like all tbeir other proceedings, had therefore no other result as to the matters in dispute, than to inflict additional trouble and delay. As to myself, they were of the same painful character as the other documents from the same quarter; that is to say, were calculated to place my conduct in the most unfa¬ vourable light before the College Committee, the Patrons, and the public. Once more, therefore, I was called upon to clear myself from their aspersions. As Dr. Bennett’s letter was simply a repetition of previous statements, and as it has not been published, farther notice of it is unnecessary. It is otherwise with the letters of Mr. Syme and Dr. Christison. To these, therefore, I have replied. I. Mr. Syme’s Letter and Charges. Mr. Syme took or sent the following letter to the Lord Provost at the Council Chambers on Tuesday morning, December 1st, and requested that it might be read at the meeting of the Town Council. His object appeared to have been simply to give all possible publicity to so serious an attack on my honour and integrity, as he had it forthwith published, in the “ Daily Scotsman — 1. From the Daily Scotsman.—Wednesday, December 2. [We have been requested by Mr. Syme to publish the following letter, which, though addressed to the Lord Provost, was not read at the meeting of Council yesterday :—-] Mill Bank House, November 30, My Lord—Having been prevented by an urgent professional call to Greenock on Saturday from being present at the conference which took place between the Patrons and the Medical Faculty of the University, I was unable then to contradict the statement made in Dr. Laycock’s printed paper that](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b30563240_0055.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
