« ZurückWeiter »
journal, or in some Eastern journal whenever I
Louisville, Ky., August 14, 1885. was able, etc., etc. That I hoped that matters Dear Doctor : Your letter of the with just remight at least be so far reconciled as to disarm ceived. In your letter of July 4th to Dr. Roberts, opposition, though I could not see how it could you place me in the false attitude of having enbe carried to the point of regaining the support deavored to defeat your reappointment at the of the seceders.
meeting of our Committee in Chicago, and afterWell, I told him much more, and however ward furnishing to the Courier-Journal an item much Dr. S. may be disliked here, I have nothing saying that I had you elected. Pardon me, but to do with that, and however great may be the I must again ask you to give me the names of the feeling against him, he is an active, quick, and several members of the committee who gave the strong man, and an ugly customer to handle. information upon which the above statements are I am now out of the Congress. My companions based.
Very truly yours, are many, embrace names which represent
W. H. WATHEN. brains, position, and large influence. I am glad I
D. W. Yandell, M.D. am out, and, as at present advised, I shall stay out. I wish now that Dr. W. had published nothing
Appledore, N. H., August 18, 1885. in the papers, or that I hadn't seen it. But I
Dear Doctor : My authority for one of my couldn't well have missed seeing it, as I received statements is to be found in the Courier-Journal, three marked copies of the Courier-Journal con
date not remembered, but published soon after taining it. Having seen it, I felt so sure that the Doctor had done me a great wrong, that I took
your return from Chicago.
My authority for the other I have previously the pains to learn just how matters in committee written you, declines to allow me to give his name. stood. The result you now know.
D. W. YANDELL.
Louisville, Ky., August 6, 1885.
Louisville, Ky., August 21, 1885. Dear Doctor : From your letter of July 4th to Dear Doctor: Your evasive answer to my reDr. W.0. Roberts, I quote the following :- quest, in a letter to you dated August 14th, re
“I had a friend see several members of the ceived to-day. committee to which Wathen belonged and make I am sorry that your remarks about me in your inquiries concerning his action at Chicago, with letter of July 4th to Dr. Roberts were communithe result of being assured that he was the only cated to others. I suppose you know that I have member of the committee who showed himself a copy of that letter. to be my enemy.
Assured at W.'s end Your statements concerning my action toward of the line in the newspapers that He had me ap- you at the meeting of the Committee of Arrangepointed. Assured at this end that he was the one ments in Chicago in June are false, and you will man who strove to defeat my REappointment." be treated as the author of the same upon your
Would you please to give me your authority failure to give other authority. for the above ? Very truly yours,
Very respectfully, W. H. WATHEN. D. W. Yandell, M.D. W. H. WATHEN. D. W. Yandell, M.D.
Isles of Shoals, off Portsmouth, N. H.,
Appledore, August 25, 1885. August 11, 1885.
Dear Sir : I have this day inclosed your comDear Doctor : Yours of the 6th came only to-munication of the 21st inst. to the gentleman who day.
I saw the letter you wrote to Dr. Hays gave the information con ning your behavior touching your action towards me, and at once
toward me at Chicago, and when his answer asked the gentleman who had told me of your
comes I will make further reply to you. behavior at Chicago, to allow me to give you his
Respectfully, name. This he declined to do.
D. W. YANDELL. What I wrote to Dr. Roberts about you was written, Doctor, in no spirit of fault-finding, but Isles of Shoals, N. H., August 30, 1885. simply as a chapter of medical history which I de- Dear Sir: To save delay, I have this day sired he should know. I had no grievance, for you written to you, care Professor Flint, New York, are a free agent and entirely capable of managing thinking you'd be in that city by the 3d proximo. your own interests.
Lest; however, you do not reach there, I write
D. W. YANDELL.
Louisville, Ky., September 7, 1885. I shall be, with Dr. Gross, in Philadelphia the Dear Sir: Your letter of August 30th was greater part of next week, and will send you received yesterday, upon my return from New from there a communication which will exonerate York City. I did not receive any letter from you me from the charge of speaking without authority, while in New York. I saw Professor Flint, Jr., though my author may have been himself in several times, but did not see his father.
Very respectfully, Your letter to Dr. Roberts is false in the follow
D. W, YANDELL. ing particulars :
W. H. Wathen, M.D. 1. In saying, that he (Wathen) was the only member of the committee who showed himself
Philadelphia, Pa., September 18, 1885. to be my enemy. 2. In saying, that he (Wathen) was the one
Dear Sir : The gentleman who told me of man who strove to defeat my reappointment.
your behavior at Chicago was Dr. S. W. Gross.
He derived his information from Dr. Minis The facts are— 1. There was opposition to your reappoint
Hays, who was in Chicago with you.
Before Dr. Hays went to Chicago, I had menment. 2. I did what I could to have you reappointed. friend. On his return he said to Dr. Gross that
tioned, incidentally, that I believed you to be my 3. Without my influence you would not have
he did not consider you my friend, that you had been reappointed. 4. Your reappointment was secured by my of the places of all the presidents of sections,
proposed, or at any rate favored, the emptying earnest appeals to the members of the committee in your behalf.
and, as I was a section president, he thought that 5. I have positive, written evidence to prove tenor, was repeated to me by Dr. Gross. When I
was not a friendly act. This, and more of like the above.
expressed surprise at such a report, and added D. W. Yandell, M.D.
that you claimed to have secured me in the office,
I was told that Dr. Hays knew nothing of the Appledore, September 10, 1885. kind, and did not believe that you had, in any Dear Sir: Referring to your communication way, accomplished such a result. of the 7th instant, it is pertinent to remark, that On the strength of this, and, as I remarked, of had you, in the beginning of this correspondence, other things of like tenor, I wrote what I did to contented yourself with denying the truth of my Dr. Roberts. Your communication of the 7th statements to Dr. Roberts instead of persistently instant puts an entirely different face upon the asking for the authority on which those state. whole matter, and had it, as I have previously ments were made, fewer letters would have written, been given in the beginning of this corpassed between us, and a much earlier under respondence, the interchange of letters need have standing would have been reached.
been small. I should have believed that Dr. You must have known that I had authority for Hays had misconstrued your acts, and misunderwhat I said. But Eastern men are less ready than stood your words. He, too, would have believed men are with us to shoulder what may become the same. When I showed him the communicaan unpleasant responsibility. I have succeeded, tion I have referred to, he was evidently pained however, in getting the consent of the gentleman, that he had given currency to impressions which who was my informant as to your conduct at were, by your statement, erroneous, and led me Chicago, to give his name, and when I meet him to believe you were my enemy instead, as you in Philadelphia, next week, I will furnish you claim, my active friend. with the evidence on which I based my letter to
I have now this to say, that with your stateDr. Roberts. I need hardly remark that in ment before me, and after having shown it to whatever respect that evidence is insufficient to Dr. Hays, I am satisfied that Dr. Hays was mis. establish the correctness of my statements, I taken in what he told Dr. Gross, and that, there. shall at once admit its insufficiency, withdraw fore, I am in error in what I wrote to Dr. what I said, and apologize for the wrong done Roberts, and owe it to you, and to the truth, to you. And I shall take pleasure in doing so. say so. I authorize you to at once make known For I had much rather think a person my friend to Dr. Roberts the foregoing, and to ask him for than my enemy.
me to make it known to every one to whom he My chief, indeed my only, concern now, in this has communicated the contents of my letter, that matter, is to show that I spoke by authority. I was unwittingly led into error in reference to Anything further than that is not now a question your action toward me at Chicago, and my between us. I thanked you once for what you statements concerning it are erroneous, and there. were said in the Courier-Journal to have done fore gladly withdrawn, and to be hereafter as for me. I hope I shall never be unmindful of though they had not been made. kindnesses done me, no matter by whom.
Before bringing this correspondence to a close,
it is due you to say that I am gratified to be able
Chestnut Street, September 28, 1885. to state that I was led into error, through, I am Dear Sir: I feel that the language of my comsure, no desire on the part of either Dr. Hays or munication from Philadelphia, legitimately conDr. Gross to make mischief between friends. veys no such meaning as that you have given it, But the source of my special pleasure is to find and that you have misconstrued both its intent that I did you a great injustice in allowing my. and spirit. self to believe you were my enemy, when you The purpose of that letter was to give you the were my friend; while I remain,
authority on which I had made certain 'stateVery respectfully and truly, ments concerning yourself, to withdraw “and D. W. YANDELL. leave as though never said” everything which
you said was incorrect. Its spirit was friendly. Louisville, Ky., September 23, 1885.
I regret that you have chosen to read it in a dif. Dear Sir: By your letter of September 18th,
Very respectfully, I find that I am asked to believe that you spoke
D. W. YANDELL. by authority, in your statements about my action
Louisville, Ky., September 29, 1885. toward yourself, and that you have condescended
Dear Sir: When I received your letter this to forget my conduct, and to acknowledge that morning, I expected to find the authority for your your informant may have been guilty of a mis
"accusations,” but I regret to say, that I feel understanding that caused you to commit an
quite keenly the disappointment, and I am comerror. Now this, on the surface, smacks of pelled to reiterate the statements in my last letter, magnanimity, but you seem to have become
as they are made by authority, which does away oblivious to the fact that I can neither crave nor
with your “misconstruction "idea. receive pardon for an offence which I have not
Either furnish me authority for your accusacommitted. Neither can I accept such an apol- tions, or come down to facts and acknowledge ogy any more than I can be induced to believe that you yourself have been my traducer. Unless that ingratitude is the reward of virtue.
you do this it is useless to protract this corres. have made your retraction, while using others
Respectfully, etc. as a subterfuge, without giving other evidence
D. W. Yandell, M.D. W, H. WATHEN. than a simple assertion, I can give your apology consideration only in the brighter light of acknowledged authority, and defend my own
Washington, D. C., July 8, 1885. conduct by the same standard.
Dear Dr. Wathen: Your note is at hand. I There must have been some mistake as to the remember that you worked for Dr. Yandell's reauthority for your statements, which is proved by tention as chairman of the Section on Surgery, the following ambiguity: In your letter to Dr. although there were others who thought it would Roberts, you say, that several members of the have been better to have selected some of our committee assured your friend, etc.," and now
more widely known surgical writers. your only authority is what Dr. Hays should
Your efforts in the case were successful, and I have told Dr. Gross. These statements, collect- am surprised that any one should imagine you had ively, show a discrepancy, and when received in opposed Dr. Yandell, when the contrary was the the light of the following communication, one
Very truly, your friend, would think that Dr. Hays would not have been
JOHN B. HAMILTON. guilty of double-dealing as your assertions indi
Dr. W. H. Wathen, Louisville, Ky.
"W. H. Wathen, M.D.
New York, July 9, 1885. “Dear Doctor: Yours of the 17th instant is just
Dear Doctor Wathen: I regret to learn that received. Nothing transpired in the committee, Dr. Yandell should have declined the appointwithin my knowledge, to justify the statement ment of chairman of the Section on Surgery of that you had opposed Dr. Yandell's election at the International Medical Congress, and remem• Yours very truly,
ber very distinctly your efforts in his behalf and I. MINIS Hays."
for representatives from your State. I seconded In conclusion, I regret to say, that in the ab. your nomination of Dr. Yandell, and believe that
he is indebted to you for his reappointment. sence of acknowledged authority for your unkind
Yours very respectfully, accusations, I have no further time to devote to
J. W. S, GOULEY. this correspondence, and I shall bring it to a close with the unpleasant reflection that my labors on behalf of my townsman have been rewarded by
Cleveland, Ohio, July 13, 1885.
My Dear Doctor: In answer to your esteemed Respectfully, etc. D. W. Yandell, M.D.
W. H. WATHEN,
favor of yesterday, in regard to the action of the Sub-Committee of Arrangements, at its recent
meeting in Chicago, Ills., the facts are: When with those malcontents in Philadelphia in dewe came to the Section on Surgery, one member nouncing the action of our committee, whose pro(not yourself) objected to Dr. Yandell's retention ceedings were not made up at the time of his acas chairman of this section, as this member did tion, and of which action he must have been in not consider him sufficiently a representative total ignorance; unless, as was claimed by some man for so prominent a section, and believed of the committee, that he was not sound on the that we had other surgeons in this country so Code. much more eminent, and whose abilities entitled I must express my astonishment at his action, them more than Dr. Yandell's to the position. as I have always entertained for him a very high It was only at your earnest personal request that opinion, both professionally and morally. this objection was withdrawn, and his name al
Very truly yours, lowed to be presented to the General Committee
D. A. LINTHICUM. for confirmation. I know that this member of the committee who made the objection, now feels
Philadelphia, Pa., July 14, 1885. that since Dr. Yandell has shown his cloven foot
My Dear Doctor: I have no hesitation in sayso beautifully in conjunction with the Philadel. ing that Dr. David Yandell, of your city, owed phia immaculates, that it was a great mistake to his appointment or reappointment directly to you. have retained him, and, that if it were to do over In the Sub-Committee, as well as in the Genagain, neither your entreaties nor persuasioneral Committee, we directly understood that each would have kept him in the place. I do not be- member was responsible for each appointment lieve any member of the Sub- or General Com- from his State. mittee of Arrangements ever said that you per- Before the meeting of the committee I know sonally opposed Dr. Yandell at the meetings of you were personally active to secure Dr. David either committee, or at any time in or out of the Yandell's reappointment. I am also quite cercommittee meetings, for it is an untruth—it is a tain that in a conversation with Dr. Yandell, I falsehood!
also stated how enthusiastic you were in his beYou are at liberty to use this letter as you deem half.
Yours sincerely, best. Yours fraternally,
JNO. V. SHOEMAKER. X. C. SCOTT, Chairman Sub-Committee of Arrangements at Chicago meeting.
West Randolph, Vt., July 15, 1885. To Wm. H. Wathen, M.D., Louisville, Ky.
My Dear Dr. Wathen : Yours of the 12th received this morning. I must express my sur
prise at what you report Dr. Yandell as saying. Helena, Ark., July 14, 1885. I do not know but some member of the com. W. H. Wathen, M.D.
mittee made such an assertion, but very much Dear Doctor : I am greatly astonished at Dr. doubt it. I am quite sure no one of the SubYandell. You will remember that there was
Committee of Nine would say that, for I well strong opposition to him in the whole committee, recollect the objections of . .. and the and that the opposition followed him into the pertinacity and tact you used in urging Dr. YanCommittee of Revision, and but for the deter-dell for the position. It was through you that mined stand you and I took in his behalf, he he obtained the position, and I do not believe that would have been mercilessly fired out. You any other member of the Sub-Committee could recollect our conversation in the rotunda at the have carried his appointment, and for quite a Palmer House, where we discussed this opposi- time I thought you would fail. I feel very contion to him. I remarked that now was the time fident in saying that to you personally and alone for you to exhibit your magnanimity. That since Dr. Yandell owes his appointment, as I do not Yandell had not been friendly to your interests, think but for yourself his name would have been and, as you now represented the profession of brought before the committee in connection with Kentucky on the committee, he being a man of the position. mark in his profession both in Europe and Would like to know if you are able to convince America, that I thought you would be acting Dr. Y. of your interest in him. nobly to sustain him as president of the Section
Fraternally and sincerely yours, on Surgery, a place that had been assigned him
E. F. UPHAM. by the defunct committee. And that when we arrived at that part of the work of revision I
Washington, D. C., July 19, 1885. would stand by you in defending and retaining Dear Doctor: Your note of the 17th is rehim in that position. When we did come to it ceived. I have no knowledge of your having our united and persistent defence saved him. opposed Dr. Yandell. As I remember it, you Can it be possible that Yandell is ignorant of this spoke to me about it on the first day, expressing fact? He must be, or he would not have joined doubts as to whether his reëlection would be satisfactory to the majority of Louisville physicians. I dictate this note to you from a sick-bed, and Subsequently, you told me that you should sup. hope you will, therefore, excuse brevity. port him, and asked me to do the same. When
Very respectfully yours, it came to voting, no one voted against him, so
A. Y. P. GARNETT. far as I remember.
Very truly yours,
Memphis, August 12, 1885. Dr. W. H. Wathen.
Wm. H. Wathen, M.D.
My Dear Doctor: Your favor of the 5th instant
came duly to hand. Replying, I would say, My Dear Wathen: Yours of July 6th came
that I do not remember to have heard you menduly to hand, and contents noted.
tion the name of Dr. D. W. Yandell, while in What Yandell means I am at a loss to con
Chicago or elsewhere. I am confident
did jecture. I know that he was by no means the
not oppose him, in any way, in my presence. popular man he supposed himself to be for the
Yours most cordially, place, and think he should feel himself under obli
F. L. Sim. gations to his friends for placing him where he tacitly desired himself. In haste,
Louisville, Ky., October 5, 1885. Yours fraternally,
My Dear Doctor Hays : Some letters have R. BEVERLY COLE.
passed between Dr. D. W. Yandell and myself,
touching my conduct toward him in the commit, Philadelphia, July 20, 1885. tee meeting in Chicago, and since he has given W. H. Wathen, M.D.
you as the source of his information, I take the Dear Doctor : Yours of the 17th instant is just liberty of inclosing so much of the correspondreceived. Nothing transpired in the committee, ence as relates to yourself
, in order that you may within my knowledge, to justify the statement have a full knowledge of what has transpired that you had opposed Dr. Yandell's election at before the publication of the same. Chicago. Yours very truly,
I need hardly say to you that I have, from 1. MINIS HAYS. members of the committee, abundant written
proof in support of my veracity. Austin, Texas, July 26, 1885. Of course, I have no concern about Dr. Yan. Dear Doctor: I was called out of our com- dell's attempt to injure me here in my native mittee-room before we reached the Section on State, where both of us are known, and I wish to Surgery, and was not present when it was replace myself only in the proper light before provised. If you had opposed the retention of Dr. fessional gentlemen, in other parts of the country, Yandell's name as its chairman, your wishes, as where his poisonous arrows may have fallen. If the representative of Kentucky, would have you have any further statement to make, please caused his decapitation. As matters have turned give it your attention at the earliest possible out, I regret that you failed to do this, since Dr. moment. I have the honor to remain, with much Yandell has joined hands with the medical com
Yours very truly, munists, in an effort to destroy the Code of the
W. H. WATHEN. American Medical Association, and open the I. Minis Hays, M.D., Philadelphia. doors to all pathies and isms. I have no sympathy for him, and none is felt for him by the profession of Texas. With best wishes for you
Philadelphia, October 7, 1885. personally, and for the success of the Congress, instant just received, and I greatly regret that a
My Dear Doctor Wathen: Yours of the 5th I remain, Very truly, your friend,
casual remark of mine should have unintentionJ. W. MCLAUGHLIN.
ally reached Dr. Yandell's ears, and have led
him to put an interpretation upon your actions Washington, D. C., August 2, 1885. which it did not justify. My Dear Doctor: Absence from home, at the Before I went to the Chicago meeting, Dr. Yanseashore, will explain to you my delay in reply- dell, in conversation with Dr. Gross and me, ing to your letter. I now do so to say that I told us that just before he left home, and while well recollect what occurred touching Dr. Yan- yet confined to his bed, he had had a " friendly dell's position on the programme. It was sug- visit” from you, during which you had freely gested that some more prominent man might be discussed what had been done at New Orleans, placed in the position which had been assigned in reference to the Congress, and the then exist
You very promptly and emphatically ing outlook, and that you could be relied upon objected to his being touched, alleging that your as not being in sympathy with the radical leaders relations with him might furnish ground for charg- on the committee. Now, from the part that you ing you with such removal.
took at Chicago, I caine to the conclusion that