Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1870-03-18

| y
issue signed Isabel 7 Cushman" had
really been written by her, should not
have deemed it worth while to have
burdened Your columns with a rejoinder:
but the shadowy forms of others are so
palpable behind her In this commnniea,
ton, destroying and giving false colors
to her ideas. and embracing the oppor-
tunity offered OF gratifying their own
malignant feelings, by santlwtching them
I with their own and since she has allowed
herself to bc made tool of, by persons
who have not tho courage to sail under
their own colors. and suffered them over
her own signature. to give expression to
thoughts which originated only in hate
and malice. must beg the indulgence OF
| n few words more.
In the letter which bears her signature,
it is claimed that history of the medical
} treatment of her husband is given from
the beginning to the end and one unac-
! quainted with the facts would suppose
that the only doctors" employed in the
case were those named. Now the ''briei
statement in that letter may he true so
far as goes, but tho suppression OF ma
terial facts in ans case. which leads to y
wrong understanding oi it, in our opinion,
! is equivalent To stating the case stronger
then the facts would Justify.
Now what do we learn lromthis "biiei
/ statement?" First that Drs. Davis, Web
! Der and Tewksbury treated the patient
/ and he grew worse. Next Hopkins was
employed and lastly Hamilton. We are
not told that carly in the disease, lock oi
} the patients hair with money was sent to
! a certain Mrs Brown. who claims tn be
/ a spiritnalist doctor and that her services
! would have been continued, had not
Trask recommended Hopkins. Neither
are we told that doctor" Ripley. another
/ spirtualist was employed before Iewks,
! bury was, and | think before Wobber.
and charged fifteen dollars visit from
} Paris. while Webbcr was severely CEN
sured for charging five for the same
! service. We get no information from
/ this brief statement of certain Mrs.
/ Hu.chins whose aid was invoked, and
who in her classical answer. stated that
The d0ctef Sed the goi dicks Of hiz Itrer
was stopi up" Think ofsuch an ignoramus
/ being summoned 10 treat Geo. Cushman,
who was always known to have supreme
contempt for any form of pretended
knowledge. and yet it has been said that
he was in the full possession OF his iacu!-
ties and approved it.
/ | shall not further handy words with
her rs to the question ofveracity between
us Although SO anxious To make II mp
/ pear in the first instance that she acted
Independently OF others. she is now wish
ing TO divide the responsibility with Gen.
/ Cushman, though whether the General
did approve of the employment ot all
these doctors" and .doctressesn is n
ques ton which think he will prefer to
answer for himself.
have never minated that Mrs Cush-
man had not right Ia employ what
ply sicians she pleased. and take counsel of
OF whom she pleased. and the msinuation
ut this point in her letter. which comes
not from her, but from the shadows be-
hind her, Is entirely gra,uitous. have
before stated that the case was regarded
rs hopeless. by competent authority. from
the beginning and it made little difference
what treatment he had. provided he WIS
made rs comfortable Is the nature Of his
case would admit. But we have every
reason to suppose that ii his disease had
not been necessarily fatal, The same course
OF treatment would have been adopted.
that was adopted, and if so | have no
doubt that. in any severe case, all hope OF
recovery would have been precluded.
Mrs. &. complains OF the use OF her
name in this controversy. Ii she had
not have authorized Davis TO use it, it
never would have been used at ell.
Afterwards she desired me to state that
Hopkins did not treat her husband during
the last six weeks, though why she wish.
ed the public 10 know that she employed
two doctors at the same time, unbesnown
TO each other, and uubeknown 10 her
friends and even to the spiritualists who
were almost daily at her house, is more
than can comprehend.
The contemplate alIusion about pre-
tended friendship and other base insinu.
atoms with which this letter abounds,
emanating not from her. bu: from the
figures behind her, are unworthy of
farther notice. The parties are welcome
to all they can make out OF it.
What was said, too, about the "merits
and dement's of medical practice-re-
ligious creeds, &C., are mere rhetorical
hourishes having no meaning in this con-
necton, since this is the first time they
have been introduced into this contro-
versy. This is called an .'inexcusable
controversy" So it is, and never would
have been, had not her spiritualst ad.
visers, encouraged by her. picked up the
gage when none had been thrown down.
have no desire to prolong it, but | shall
defend myself when attacked and ma
ligned, whether it be by open foes, or by