A report of the trial of Cooper v. Wakley, for an alleged libel, taken by shorthand writers employed expressly for the occasion : with an engraving of the instruments, and the position of the patient / together with B. Cooper's "Prefatory remarks" on the evidence, and a copious explanatory appendix, by Thomas Wakley.

Date:
1829
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: A report of the trial of Cooper v. Wakley, for an alleged libel, taken by shorthand writers employed expressly for the occasion : with an engraving of the instruments, and the position of the patient / together with B. Cooper's "Prefatory remarks" on the evidence, and a copious explanatory appendix, by Thomas Wakley. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The University of Glasgow Library. The original may be consulted at The University of Glasgow Library.

    16/174 (page 8)
    <8 jor me puriioie or recfiving; tnerein mvers persons sutlenn^ uridt-r ana amictea witu diseaee; and the said plaintiff, before and at the time of the com]>osiiip, writing and publisl^ing the said siipjiosfd libols,;ai)d iihellous,piatterb by the baid defendant, as iu the said deehiralion mentioned, was and still is one of the surgeons to the said hoS|>ital, and had been elected by the Governor^ of the said lu)spital as such suri^eon from the circumstance of his beinp: a iitpheW of Sii' Astley Ciioper, Hart., aud not from any supe- Xitoe fiualifieations, knowledge, or attainments on his'part its a surgeon ; and the said d^fcndapt i'urtber saith, that before and at the time, of the commiititig the said sup- posed grievances, as in the said declaration meiilioned, the said defendant was the editor of a certaiirperiodical and critical work tailed The Lancet, in which said work the said defendant had been used to insert and publish, from time to time, reports of cases and surgical operations which had been jjerformed in the public hospitals of this kingdom by the respective surgeons thereof, for the information of medical and surgical practitioners and persons studying the science of medicine and surgery, and tti tlie great advancement of medical and surgical knowledge; and the said delendaut further saith, that before the conmiitting of the said grievances tlie said Stephen Pojiard had been admitted and received into the said hospital, that he might undergo the operation of lithotomy, the said plaintiff, being such surgeon to the said hoS])ital as aforesaid, did, before the committing the said grievances, to wit, on the said ll-th day of March, in the year aforesaid, at Westminster aforesaid, perform the said operation of lithGtomy on the said Stephen Pollard, before and in the presence of divers, to wit, 200 students and other persons being there and then collected and assembled for the purpose of viewing the said operation on the said Stephen Pollard. And the said defendant further saith, that the said supposed libels and libellous matters in the said declaration rhentioued were and are reports of what took place during the said operation, and OQ'the post-mortem examination of the said Stephen Pollard, coupled with critical observations on the manner and want of skill in which the said plaintiff performed the said operation; and which said report was, before the committing of the said supposed grievances, to wit, on the day and year in the declaration mentioned, transmitted to the said plaintiff for insertion in the said work called The Lancet. And the said defendant fm ther says, that he, believing the said report and observations to be true, and to contain a fair, impartial, and correct represeritation of what took place during the said operation and the said post-mortem examination, and that the observations contained in such report were correct, and a fair critique on.the manner and want of skill of the said plaintiff in performing the said operation, and not knowing the contrary thereof, did afterwards, to wit, at the said times when, and in the said de- claration mentioned, at Westminster aforesaid, for the advancement uf surgical know- ledge and information, and without malice or ill-will towards the said plaintiff, insert, print, and publish, and cause and procure to be inserted in the said critical work called The Lancet, the said supposed libels and libellous matters in the said declaration men- tio^.ed. And the said defeudatit further says, that the said supposed libels and libellous matters in the said declaration mentioned, contained and do contain a true, fair, and correct report in substance of what took place during the said operaiion, and the post- mortem examination aforesaid, and fair, pertinent, and critical remarks and cbserya- fi'ons of and concerning the said plaintiff, as such surgeon, and the manner in which he performed the said operation of lithotomy as aforesaid, to wit, at Westmii^ter aforesaid : and this he, the said defendant, is ready to verify, &c. F. KLLLY. ^' The Question for the consideration of the jury would be, whether the evidence t1ie'defendant might call, substantiated these pleas; if it did, the verdict would have to be for hiu), if not, it would liave to be for the plaintifi, and then they would have to consider what amount of dainages should be given. ';,Sit;James Scarlett and M Wakley, the defendant, both rose, at tlie.same, time, ijut the latter resumed his seat. , ;^ Sir James .Scarlelt then said—My Lord, some of the affirmative issues are throwri' upon the plaintiff, who, I understand, this day intends tx): i^o.ve his own skill ! < ,i ..j r vii) io7'ci Tenferrfew—\Yhich of them,? , . , j S'ir James Scarleti--1 will state it to your Lordship: - The plaintifi then and there performed the said operation in au unskilful and unsurgeon-like manner;