[Controversy with Dr. John Eberle].

  • Webster, James, 1803-1854.
Date:
[1827?]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: [Controversy with Dr. John Eberle]. 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.)

    5/10
    is in my power; nor do I intend to withdraw from it, my occasional as? distance subsequently. Dn. E. The Doctor must have been very much disgusted at my conduct, when he wrote this. In this letter Dr. Eberle also mentions the subject of my talcing the patient to the Aims-House, instead of taking him to Dr. M'Clellan. 1 answered this letter on the 23rd, and stated my surprise that he should have taken up a subject concerning another person. I also wrote in the same letter as follows: Yours of yesterday is before me, and note its contents, as it regards the Medical Recorder, I assure you I have never wished you to remain its Editor longer than you might find it to be to your advantage, neither do I wisii your withdrawing, to weaken in the least the friendship subsisting between us. j. w. On the same evening I received an answer from which the following is an extract: As to your deeds of opposition, (meaning to M'Clellan,) I refer you to the Eye patient, whom you took to the Alms House. Con- sidering that Dr. Eberle had done me injustice, I wrote him of date 25th and said, I was willing to lay the affair about the Eye patient before any impartial person, and if it appeared that I had acted incorrectly I would give satisfaction. Dr. Ebekle knowing this course \voi:ld not answer, de- clined answering me. I wrote to him again on the 28th requesting an im- mediate reply, and received a note from the Doctor the same day, wherein he said, he would have nothing more to do with the subject. This no doubt he thought prudent and was willing to let the affair drop: Not so with me. I then addressed another note to the Doctor, which left him no alternative in relation to the Journal but the one he pursued, as will be seen from the following extract of my letter: It would appear from your letter of the 22nd, that your Editing- the American Medical Recorder is a disadvantage to you, and that you intend to discontinue it after the present year. In reply I said, I never wished you to remain longer than you might find it to your advantage. I now repeat it with this addition, that although the un» derstanding between us is, that you edit for this year, yet rather than it should be the least injury to you, I will exonerate you from any obliga- tion you may consider yourself under on that score. You are therefore at perfect liberty to discontinue now, if you please; and in fact I think it would be as well to be so. Every one that reads this extract must say, that it was a genteel way of saying, you may retire, or you will be dismissed: and that the Doctor viewed it in this light is evident from the following extract: Dr. E. to J. TV. 30th April, 1823. I did intend to edit the Recorder, according to our agreement, to the end of this year; as you are good enough, however, to exonerate me from completing this volume, I do relinquish it. It will be recollected that I have said, I had no wish to quarrel with the Doctor, and as a proof of this, I was unwell and called him in as my Phy- sician and paid him a Medical Bill. After this affair we frequently met as friends, he called on me, and I called on him: at one of our interviews, the subject of the Recorder was mentioned, and from the manner in which the Doctor spoke, I observed, perhaps he might have the work again with an- other Editor, and mentioned Dr. C.— here the subject dropped. In a day or two after, the Doctor wrote me, from which the following is an extract: Dr. E. to J. TV. 15th May, 1823. I have made up my mind, that if you will connect with me Dr. JH'Cieliah, and divide between us $300 in money and $200 in books, I will go on. To which I replied, that I would have nothing whatever to do with Dn. M'Clellan, therefore the affair must end. And to this I received the following reply. Dr. E. to J. W. 15th May, 1823. The proposition 1 made this morning was not of a selfish character, i