Address to the Medical Society of London : together with some correspondence relative to a consultation at Norwich.

  • Murphy, Edward William, 1802-1877.
Date:
1851
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Address to the Medical Society of London : together with some correspondence relative to a consultation at Norwich. 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.

    12/16 (page 12)
    pulse, the pulso of luemorrhagic exhaustion, and it was most desirable for her safety that the whole should be expelled. Dr. Bell’s treatment (which was not homoeopathic), was entirely directed to that object. You are aware that manual efforts are some- times made to remove an hydatid mass, knowing that whatever pain may be caused it is fully compensated by the complete arrest of the luemorrhage. When I saw Mrs. G-. the haemorrhage had ceased, but she was so exhausted, her pulse so rapid, her countenance so bloodless, that it was evident haemorrhage had been going on for sometime. She had just the appearance which this disease always presents, in con- sequence of the frequently repeated dis- charges to which it gives rise. I feel, there- fore, some difficulty in understanding your assertion that there was no alarming haemorrhage until the 30th April. With regard to the manual efforts said to be used by Dr. Bell, I do not by any means justify “ the exertion of extreme force upon the body from four in the after- noon of that day, till one in the morning of the next, ” but you will pardon me in expressing any opinion on these points, without having also Dr. Bell’s statements of these facts. I wish at present, that you would con- sider this communication to be made to you in confidence, as I have not written to Dr. Bell, and am extremely unwilling to do so, because it must have an effect that is extremely injurious among professional men, nor can I perceive that any useful purpose can be accomplished by it. If, however, you think otherwise, I shall at once communicate with Dr. Bell, and learn from him Iris explanation of the statement you have forwarded. With regard to the opinion I have given, I see no reason to alter anything that I have said, but merely to explain that in stating a probable cause of the disease, I must be guided by the account I receive, and either of those, yours, or Dr. Bell’s, would be sufficient for the purpose. I remain, dear sir, Yours truly, Edwaed W. Muephy. [These letters refer to a statement to which I shall presently allude. Mr. Cooper did not wait my reply, but hastened up to London, and I regret that he did not think proper to call upon me, which one would suppose to be a natural course; not doing so is a sufficient proof of the animus that guided him, inasmuch as I have been given to understand that the special object of his visit was to obtain certificates from other professional men to prove that my opinion eoidd not be correet; that it was in fact a pathological blunder. If this be true, it shows Mr. Cooper’s desire rather to attack me than to accept any explana- tion that I could offer him, and will just ify the suspicions which the tone of his cor- respondence excited. After a few days I received the following note :—] No. IV. 10, Fencliurcli Buildings. Dear Sir,—Your communication of the - 12th inst. did not reach me till yesterday, having left Norwich for London on that ! day. The assertion of Dr. Bell as to the cause of Mrs. G.’s present disease, and i your confirmation of its extreme proba- bility, has had so prejudicial an effect on my professional reputation, that I am in- duced to bring the matter before the pro- fession generally. I must, therefore, beg i of you to make any communication you i may think right with Dr. Bell upon the I subject, and consider that all correspon- dence which you may have the courtesy to hold with me roust be done without any confidential reserve. I am, dear sir, Yours faithfully, William Coopee. The letter No. 3 inclosed a statement which charged Dr. Bell and another gentle- man with “ having attempted to dilate the womb by means of an instrument,” and with having used extreme force upon the body of Mrs. Or.” This was certified by Mr. Gladstone. Being forwarded to Dr. Bell, I received from him another state- ment of a very different kind, in which Dr. Bell’s treatment is given in detail, but no mention made of any instrument being used. This was also attested by Mr. Glad- stone in the following words :—“ The above is what I believe to be a true statement of the case of my beloved wife as it came under my own observation; and I take this opportunity of saying that whatever may be the opinion of any concerning the medical treatment which has been followed by those who have had the case under their care, I feel under the deepest obligation to Dr. Bell for his most disinterested care and kindness ; and I take the first opportunity of expressing my belief that, whatever dif- ference of opinion may exist, I have the greatest cause for thankfulness to all the medical gentlemen concerned, whose sincere object has, I believe, been to be instru- mental under God in restoring my dear wife to me.” The two statements appeared to me contradictory and irreconeiloable. Expectmg from Mr. Cooper somo public statement of his case, I was surprised to read in the Lancet, May 17th, an anony- mous letter, making an attack upon Dr.