Analysis and refutation of the Statements of facts in relation to the expulsion of James C. Cross from Transylvania University --recently published by Dudley, Mitchell & Peter / by James Conquest Cross.
- Cross, James Conquest.
- Date:
- 1846
Licence: Public Domain Mark
Credit: Analysis and refutation of the Statements of facts in relation to the expulsion of James C. Cross from Transylvania University --recently published by Dudley, Mitchell & Peter / by James Conquest Cross. Source: Wellcome Collection.
Provider: This material has been provided by the National Library of Medicine (U.S.), through the Medical Heritage Library. The original may be consulted at the National Library of Medicine (U.S.)
8/42
![belief, even with unsuspicious and credulous men, were simple enough to imagine that they would give plausibility to and even strengthen their testimony, by making the fol- lowing declaration: It is proper to apprise the reader, that the following statements of facts were audably read in the hearing of the persons whose signatures they bear, and ap- proved by all, as setting forth the true state of the case. This was absolutely necessary, for as they were going to give a false version of facts, a careful camparison of notes was indis- pensible, otherwise the glaring contradictions of which they would necessarily have been guilty, would have rendered any refutation of their statements, on my part, a work of super- erogation. When lawyers suspect concert or collusion amongst witnesses they are examin- ed separately, and not in the presence of one another. Had they have read Starkie on Evi- dence, they would not, it is probable, have been betrayed into the commission of so egre- gious a blunder. But they do not read much, and what is more unfortunate, understand but little, should it be above the comprehension of a dull school boy, of what they do read. Had they read the work to which I have re- ferred they would have discovered the useful fact that a perfect correspondence in the evi- dence of a number of witnesses in regard to petty and unimportant details, tends to invali- date and destroy rather than establish the truth of their testimony. When the Trio con- sented to engage in so unprincipled an enter- prise they should undoubtedly have compared notes to exclude the possibility of a contradic- tion, but they should not so indiscreetly have betrayed to the public the precaution they had taken. After committing a blunder that casts a deep shadow of suspicion over all they have said, if it does not altogether discredit their statements, they have the dauntless assurance to say: The medical profession may rest satisfied that the exhibition herein made, is based on irrefutable testimony. Where is it to be found? Not surely in their ''Statements for I venture the allegation, without reluctance or the least misgiving, that a book of the same size, intended to be exclusively dialectic in its character, so entirely made up of empty and independent assertions cannot be found in any language or in any library on eaith. Having disposed of the preface which every sensible man must censure as positively pro- ving that the Trio have no confidence in the intelligence of the public or respect for them- selves, we proceed to an examination of the statement of Dr. Dudley. This production is perfectly characteristic of its source, for it is as full of duplicity and falsehood as a bad egg is of sulphuretted hydrogen gass and it is quite as offensive. But here it is. In 1837, the Trustees of Transylvania Lni' versity were called upon to fill certain vacant chairs in the Medical Department of the Insti- tution. A short time previous to that period,Dr. Cross began to practice upon the religious cre- dulity of our society, [Dr. Cross had not lived in Lexington but three months for the ten years previous to his appointment to a professorship in the Transylvania Medical School,] in order to wipe away the odious stains upon a character [and which Dr. Dudley should not only have re- collected in 1837, if indeed such stains existed, when he entreated me to become his colleague, but the sensibility he now affects should have admonished him of the necessity there was for- doing something 'to wipe away the odious stains' with which his own character was as thick- spotted as is the body of a leopard] he had formed for himself, and to open thereby a new career to foul ambition. In the exemise of this piece of stratagem he succeeded so far as to se- cure the confidence of the Rev. N. H. Hall, one of the clergymen of our city, and a Trustee of Transylvania University. Actuated by none other than honorable mo- tives, Parson Hall presented the name of Dr. Cross to fill one of the vacant Professorships in the Medical School, and urged his appointment, with those of the individual members of the Medi- cal Faculty who were opposed to his introduction into the School; also with Mr. Gratz and other members of the Board of Trustees, the Rev. Mr. Hall made every effort with a view to concilia- tion and union upon Dr. Cross; pledging himself at the time to Mr. Gratz and other members of the Board of Trustees, that he (Parson Hall) would be among the first in moving for the ex- pulsion of Dr. Cross whenever he should prove himself unworthy of his place. Upon the strength of Parson Hall's influence, and his pledge given, Dr. Cross was elected. Within a few days past, the Rev. gentleman, at my door, re-called to my mind the above particulars re- garding the introduction of Dr. Cross into the School; [and I beg the reader to recall this de- claration to mind when he reads the two letters of Mr. Hall to be found on subsequent pages;] nor is it without authority [the reader will think otherwise before long] that this allusion is made to the facts in the case. The ceremony of installation was scarcely concluded before reasons for regret at his admis- sion into the School began to accumulate; and when the odiousness of his conduct [as was evinced at the trial of Connet, when I proved that either Dr. Dudley knew nothing of the sub- ject of which he spoke or was determined not to tell the truth] admitted no longer of toleration, and his removal became an imperative duty, the action of the Board of Trustees was unanimous in dissolving the connexion, [because I had re- signed before they knew anything on the subject, if my late colleagues are to be believed in what they say to me in their letter requesting me to resign, and that, too, under circumstances which precluded the hope, if even they desired it, that I would suffer the connexion to continue,] a unanimity well calculated to check the caieer](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b21112022_0008.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
