The homoeopathic petition examined: and the fallacies of the faculty exposed: in a letter to the Very Reverend the Principal of the University of Edinburgh / by Ascriptor.

Date:
1852
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: The homoeopathic petition examined: and the fallacies of the faculty exposed: in a letter to the Very Reverend the Principal of the University of Edinburgh / by Ascriptor. 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.

    16/20 (page 16)
    1G masons and quarrymen; and no doubt some fractional allowance must be made on this ground. I have no occasion to make any other estimate of the value of Mr Syme’s signature; nor have we this writer’s opinion on that point. For anything I know, he may be prepared to say as much good of the Professor of Clinical Sur- gery, as Sir Dugald Dalgetty’s visitor in the castle-dungeon said of the Marquis of Argyll. As to the respective characters of these two documents, the Patrons seem to have taken substantially the same view which I take, or, at least, to have arrived at the result to which it leads. The prayer of the Memorial was refused with a well-timed re- buke; that of the Petition was granted, by its being transmitted to the Sencitus. I cannot better conclude this letter than by directing your atten- tion, and that of the other members of the Senatus, to the “ end of the matter ” in the Council Chamber. Should the Senatus be of opinion that these observations of the Lord Provost are calculated to convey to students an erroneous impression, you will no doubt feel in honour bound to see that it be corrected. I believe, however, that his words truly express the sentiments of the Senatus. The Lord Provost said—“ He had talked to some of the Pi’ofessors on the subject, and he believed it would not have been possible to have got even a small number to reject any student on account of his Homoeopathic tendencies. He believed that that which CAUSED TIIE COMPLAINT HAD BEEN DONE SOMEWHAT INADVER- TENTLY, AND IIE WAS SATISFIED THAT EVERY STUDENT, WHAT- EVER HIS NOTIONS REGARDING HoMIEOPATHY MIGHT BE, WOULD HENCEFORTH FIND NO BARRIER TO HIS OBTAINING DEGREES. ’ I have the honour to be, Reverend Sir, Your obedient servant, ASCRIPTOE,