Licence: Public Domain Mark
Credit: Illustrations of medical evidence and trial by jury in Scotland. Source: Wellcome Collection.
Provider: This material has been provided by the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh. The original may be consulted at the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh.
56/66 (page 52)
![jnost Justifiably on wliat Dr Dobiu told him. If be meant to say that be expressed an o])iniou when he bad not, by personal inspec- tion, gi’onnds for that opinion, that would have been a very different imputation indeed. That would have been an imputation which Mr Glover might have thought treated him with very little respect, but with which he would hardly have come into Court. I must say, however, this does not seem to me a very serious and aggravated case of slander, and accordingly the Dean stated that pi’obably it would not have been brought before you but for what followed, and they could not bring the second matter forward with- out the first. The second matter is more serious. Here the de- fender undertakes to prove that the pursuer granted a certificate, on soul and conscience, that he had examined a patient, whom, in point of fact, he had never examined. Now, gentlemen, looking to the nature of the certificate, the inquiries made by Mr Glover, and the evidence given by Dr Dobie, you will say whether you can find it true that the certificate was false, in so far as in it Mr Glover ex- pressed an opinion on matters on which he had no materials for forming an opinion at all, and as to which he had not the means of knowing anything whatever. That is the point for your considera- tion under the first issue. Then, as I have said, the second matter comes to be a good deal stronger. In that second issue, which con- tains the letter addressed to the Commissioners of Police, and pub- lished in the Medical Journal, Professor Syme says :—“ Indeed, un- less able to prove that Mr Glover did not examine the patient, whom he has declared, ‘ on soul and conscience,’ that he did carefully ex- amine ”—It is most unfortunate for Mr Syme that he will never keep to the terms either of the certificate or of Mr Glover’s pub- lished letter—“ I should ere now have tendered my resignation, until assured against a repetition of the alleged outrage ; ” and the com- plaint there is that the defender falsely and caluinniously asserted of the pursuer, that he had falsely certified, on soul and conscience, that he had carefully examined a patient whom, in point of fact, he had never examined. Now the certificate, you will observe, bears nothing about careful examination ; if it had done so, that would have given it a character considerably different in point of impoi’t- ance. The object, however, of Mr Glover’s examination was only to satisfy his mind on the two points already stated ; and this did not require nor infer a careful examination of the limb. Indeed, of what use would that have been ? If danger arose from the injury.](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b21913134_0058.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
