Case of divorce of Andrew Ure, M.D. v. Catharine Ure.

  • Ure, Andrew, 1778-1857.
Date:
[1821]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Case of divorce of Andrew Ure, M.D. v. Catharine Ure. 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.)

    8/60
    preferred against Mrs. Ure and himself, with a commen- tary on the evidence, forming a laboured answer to the pro- secution, so that had it come out, we should have been possessed of so much of the facts of the case, as to allow of a just decision, which of all things, he most fearfully de- precated and avoided. An opinion however may be formed of this notable pro- duction from the following incident. As soon as a know- ledge of the publication of it came to the municipal court of Glasgow, an Interdict, to use the Scotch term, a legal pro- cess, analogous to an injunction from a court of Chancery, is issued, forbidding the sale of it, on the ground of its con- taining a tissue of falsehoods, and particularly on account of the letter purporting to be from Dr. Ure to his wife.* That this pamphlet was suppressed by a legal decree, is not denied. When asked at an interview with Dr. Phy- sick, Dr. Dewees, and myself, for copies of it, he tells us that through the influence of Dr. Ure and his friends, the work had been seized by an order of court. This is fully confirmed in the letter from his friend Mr. Walker, who says: Being prevented by some legal restraint on the part of his adversaries from publishing it, I attended and heard it read, as far as was permitted.] The effect indeed, of this event, was most fatal. Even his best friends abandon him,—recall the testimonials they had previously granted, and with the denunciations of an in- censed community, he precipitately retreats from Glasgow. To the gentlemen of Baltimore, who rather incautiously, * I assert this on the authority of a Scotch gentleman, who communicated it to General Cadwalader and myself. The fact however is now so generally known as not to be questioned. t This alludes to an interruption which he experienced from the audience. It has been stated here by several gentlemen, and by one particularly, who on the occasion, was seated only a few feet-from Mr. Pattison, that after a short time a scene of great confusion took place, which ended in the dispersal of the com- pany, before one third of the defence was read.