Correspondence and statements regarding the teaching of clinical medicine in the University of Edinburgh, 1855-1857 : with a sequel / by T. Laycock.

  • Laycock, Thomas, 1812-1876.
Date:
1857
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Correspondence and statements regarding the teaching of clinical medicine in the University of Edinburgh, 1855-1857 : with a sequel / by T. Laycock. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    33/70 (page 33)
    silould open the session of 1857-58, and lecture exclusively during the summer trimestre of 1858. (See Letters pp. 12, 14, and 30.) 5. Because in the printed notice issued by the Sonatus, announcing the proposed changes, posted on Monday 2d instant, the Senatus acknowledged Dr. Laycock’s right to lecture during the winter trimestre, by describing Dr. Bennett as giving the additional course on additional days. (Notice, p. 5.) 6. Because last year Dr. Bennett began the session and lectured six months. Dr. Lay cock only three months. This year it was arranged to be the reverse. (Dr. Bennett’s letter. No. 10, p. 14.) 7. Because whatever may be ih.Q rights of “senior Professors” arbi¬ trarily to set aside arrangements proposed by themselves, and confirmed by the Medical Faculty and Senatus, for years before Dr. Laycock joined the University, the junior Professor was in the custom of opening the course. (Dr. Christison’s spring spell as usual,’’’’ Letter 1, p. 7.) Again expressing my most sincere regret that the painful necessity of placing this account before the Patrons of the University has been forced upon me, I beg leave to submit to them that the question as to past proceedings is within a small compass. It is whether their in¬ junction to the two Professors concerned, to carry on the customary rotation of clinical teaching, during the ensuing Session, has been com¬ plied with by Dr. Bennett; and, specially, whether he had any right, as “ senior Professor,’’ which justified his posting the notice before mentioned upon the College gates, and acting thereupon to thrust me from my duties as clinical teacher—with rights at least equal to his own, under the powers of their commission—in a manner wholly unpre¬ cedented, I believe, in the history of the University. But another important question arises as to the customary rotation of service in the clinical wards themselves. The Medical Faculty, in enforcing their resolution to change the system of teaching, induced the Managers of the Infirmary to allocate the male patients to Dr. Bennett, the female to me ; and to enjoin at the same time, a change of patients every three months. Dr. Bennett is therefore now lecturing exclu¬ sively upon the cases of male patients, and will either require me to j make an exchange of wards in February, or will retain his wards. If he elect to do the former, the students will have been taught during the Session on male cases exclusively; if the latter, the teach¬ ing of each Professor will have been limited to the diseases of one sex. By the one arrangement, no teaching on female cases can be given at all; by the other, no comparative teaching of diseases, as they occur in the two sexes, can be instituted, while the Professor can have no oppor- ■ tunity of teaching upon those diseases peculiar to or more common in one or other of the sexes. As to the summer course, the defects and j unfairness are still more striking. By the system of rotation as to the