Truth : a libel by law : the evidence of Sir J.Y. Simpson, bart., M.D., and others, in the case of Sharp versus Wilson, with diagrams and correspondence / by James Wilson.

  • Wilson, James, L.F.P.S.
Date:
1869
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Truth : a libel by law : the evidence of Sir J.Y. Simpson, bart., M.D., and others, in the case of Sharp versus Wilson, with diagrams and correspondence / by James Wilson. 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.

    145/152 (page 131)
    anotlier professional friend regarding the extraordinary treatment received by rhein, if an opinion is expressed, he is liable to be sued for damages in a covu-t of justice, (?) because, forsooth, his opinion was never asked. The defender in the present c-i-se was allowed to plead justification for calling the pursuer's professional reputatiou into doubt. Medical men, who heard only the pm'suer's own version of the case ia Court, said they could see nothing wrong in the practice of the pursuer; medical men who heard the version both of the pursuer and of the defender condemned in the strongest tenns the treatment followed by the pm-suer in several cases. Thus, then, the medical men, in the eyes of the judges, seemed to differ in their opinions: the judges, being unable to comprehend those abstnise subjects connected with the practice of obstetrics, and with logical induction approaching to the meaningless comments of imbeciles, said, as there was a doubt on the subject, and as there was a diii'erence of opinion in the medical evidence, they must give the pursuer, the accused pai-ty, the benefit of the doubt hanging on the propriety of the line of prac- tice adopted by him in the treatment of certain patients, and give him a verdict of not proven. The defender doubted the sldlfulness of the pursuer's practice in a private note befoi-e going into Court; and the Judges of the Supreme Court have publicly affii-med his decided opinion by also doubting it—a decision the pursuer could have obtained nearer home, at much less expense, and by parties far better qualified to judge than even the Lords of the Inner House. The piu-suer went into Court for the pmpose of vindicating his professional reputation—for the purpose of wiping off that foul slain of slp.nder which had been thrown upon it by the opinion I expressed regarding it to Dr Greig, and it is for you and the public to judge whether or not his professional reputation, or his vanity as a skilful operator, has been im- proved or gi-atified by a long, wavering, and ruinously expensive litigation. I, the defender, am of opinion I have made out my point at an immense sacrifice, but with a clear conscience, in bringing startling revelations in connection with the practice of oui- profession before the facility, which must arouse some from the drowsy lethargy of ignorance to a sense of their highly responsible office; and I smcerely hope that the case of Sharp v. Wilson will be known and discussed in every quarter of the civilised globe, showing how doctors differ, and that much good from their differences may yet acoinie to the never-ceasing requirements of sufferina- liumanity. ^ I am, Sir, yours, &c., r. 11 on,7 ^ •, ,n„o James Wilson, Surgeon, Z)e/e«c/a-. Cnllen, 20//t April, 1868. o > ^ Glasgow Sentinel, Mai/ 9, 18G8. To the Editor of the Glasgow Sentinel. Sm,—I have seen your excellent remarks under the head of How Doctors Differ and also a well-expressed letter on the same subject by Dr Wilson and in conse rZ\\^:Z Ir '^'w^,' *° .^^^■'^ P--^'-^ °f -i^— and of the decirn ^^,no f f u °^ y'^f'^' appears to me that it would have been more 3rta ntvTth';T'Vl.°*'''' imfortunate case as a remarkable instance of the ncertamty of tho law than as a specimen of how doctors differ. Li that case the fn>?rnfTr' PlT^T^, ^''t i° the same circmnstances as the kni'hts in he fable of the go d and silver shield. Those who were examined on behalf of the pursuer saw only the silver side, while those for the defence saw hnt^^ L ! each gave their opinion according to their light. It isTc y p^^io to fr;^