, 1861-10-18

eAVA GA2Eht toc4O11Bs &0Q AGC1sk0eeA GAtJ QAe~
eionariey, acting under the direction Of any
christian denouinatlon-an to be under the
supervision Of the Board Of Managers Of tho |
Association IN conjunction with committee
Of citizens from the different psrtx Of The city,
consisting Of the following gentlemen, who
have, at the request Of the Association, con.
sented to cooperate With them.
cHUxs's co1x1z1xE,
Thes. s. Dickinson. D.J: EE,
G.. Il. Ho1den4 Frederick Tuttle,
6. 9. Cook; e. +. Mecornick.
ASSOCIATION AAKAaEns,
{ S:y: T FspSel], Fs5xeH, 81; + gRsasssxoea, Raas:s
s Z, Browne, T. H. Guilford,
1. &. Alexander, q. G. Underwood,
John Goebal, AL, EeWeu
Samuel Blies,
Sub committees appointed by these joint
committees, will make an efficient organiza-
ton for systematic work, commanding the
confidence Of the benevolent, that their chari-
ties win be worthily bestowed. We lea1n that
1t Is the intention not to pay out dollar Of
the funds to gents--Mlssionariee deriving
their support from the societies employing
them, and the Sunday School visitors perform
Ing their 1abors gratuitorsly, thus all receipts
will be disbursed exclusively to tbs needy.
It is certainly very commendab1e In the As
sociat.on to>nnde1take such work, and we
very much mistake the sentiments of the pub.
lie generally, If they do not choose this char-
mel as the most economical 8ad efficient one,
to make charitable disbursements.
We bespeak for the effort, such an endorse
ment as the object demands, aud the persons
connected with 1t have right to expect
Malpractice Case.
The cage Of julia Farrell vs. Frederick L. Cad
well, which hes been On trial for geyerM days past
in the Superior Court and which We have noticed,
IVES given to the jury Wednesday night. The trisl
has proved to be one Of the most interesting that
las taken place In this ccnnty fot a long time.
The principal w1tnels for the plaintiff was her
fister. who attended her to the defendants odacs
before The operation, and during her subsequent
sickness. She was, however, corroborated IN mneh
Of her testimony by The associates OF the plaintiff
and By Mr.. Sommers the keeper Of the City 8otel,
md Miss Somme7s.
The facts brought ont by the plaintiffs counsel
are substantially taat the plaintiff, who was Is
years old at the time she applied to DR.. Caldwell,
had email white spot upon the corner Of the left
eye, covering nearly the whole Of the pupil. That
this snot suncane rnnn the eve Numerically after
the plaintiff Is recovery from the small pox. which
che hs7 when ahout f1ur xears rad rhfs aear
thcneh it caufed the eve to1oof ha4y and ohseured
fts vision had remained of the pa1oa siza and m
pearaDee ever since fts first annearsnee, I'LL the
onei,at1on complained of. The nlatntit and her
sietrr Eent tn the defeudent In June. 1ssn
.rd s.hea him fr ha took M encb enota
tn rh5cb be 1en1;ed rea and at that
ard snhseonent Conversations az +be sfs.
tor +es+iees rpnresented that be con1a n,te
lint eve ,n1x IA ,a7, an Tho r;pht eva which xyaa
then perfect In a1l respects that the oneratfon
,ror1d rot onnonnt In anvrhi,1 mo-a +h.n tat;oo. .
hit ctf be, finger wf MID mt teen har fron, her
vo,t-1,o +6sn efv or aaver aava ana @rhon o.to5
hr +ba e,s+e, r. q ron1d 3n3r,e +ha n+t.- e, +ho
;5e,srdun+ .naperea :. M ;, +1.t ha swor15 ~
mil IN he 1voa uortb - ebon1d mt -, +ha+ 5a
xvon6 5. On hail 15s life Il uon,a not :, II a1eo
s,,reered .ba+ ba ahouad ~. 1,s,ntfer 49,
tifrsa1 evu. ana eatad har hn- sh.
won76 1,ta ona ri thosa opd +o1a hs- +,,a+ 49,.
the vay he would Fl. her eve Init aha ohiacted
that ehe ron7d mt &-ea- r. IN ~. a7th ~ I,1,
the defendant n4rsor1ned an orerat5on nnon tha
eve cf +he n1.fntiff nv Introducing a raed1e and
tbresa ~ oo1r tr,,,.,.11 t,, -s,,,ts s-o+ ~ 49,
49, - .ba a,-,.- ,r-;t7, = o.t.,oo+ ~, 80.
thfs +ha riafn+;F 800 :, +,a dara-5sn+,s ot,.a
eygry other day for two veekg 1t tha end Of which
time sympathetic Inflammation set IN IN the other
.. .s,sinrv a3r,,aa. ~ e1c1,+ .,d f,,n, +ho+
the Inflammation continued to increase and the
sight to diminish, until, about the mid
die of September the plaintiff left the
oe1e1oans' past recovery Aeef tne lnnam-
naelon ses L. .ne aetsnoant olecsea tue p's1a1'n
~ ~ *o .s ,iaD -. het ,ae. tos.. S,ne ~ ~
7,ed Eo+wi,hatan7ino tho acnte ~ fnf,smnat;on ~ n
the head and ewes, which had now forced the pa-
t,ent tn take t her he'd and had bronoht m almost
total blindness, the defendant insisted that shs
should be brought to his Office for treatment, and
threatened her sister that she did not bring her
| anenees' ene Was mus orougn. 10 n'm seFefal
% 4as ne +sad .1sfra soa w. ~. ~ o
fervs15, w d. n-. Ho1l.nd ena davis were Called IN n.
but to no anil.
The medical testimony condemned the operation
altogether Is ueelees for the purpose OF removing
the scar, as another one would, Under the nos'
favorable circumstances. form IN the healing O
the wound made ~ me opetas1on, ana II was IN
pto4eeaona. 70 petlof1a an opstaN'a ~. .ue pat
ress - sn.s - ',a-st,a1 esns;na +ta .oe
- ~ ssaht - ~ n the ~ 1oos ~ Thev s,.o condemnet
she +7es+ment nnrxned v the defendant after tn
onerst1on. a. calculated 10 increase Inflammation
The defence set up that the plaintiff, when al
I applied to him, had stapaMoxsa, which caused th
| 80 IN nrntrnaa md dnroa1da3 4rs <,p,s+}or T.