The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1881-02-21
Trouble Among the Bangor Doctors.

Trouble Among the Bangor Doctors.
DR.. Eugene f. Sanger of Bangor, has just
been expelled from the Penobscot Medical
among the physicians of that city. The
charges against him are:
1. Unprofessional conduct in prescribing
for patient who was under the charge OF Dr.
c. P. Thomas.
2. Allowing advertisements and notices OF
his skill to appear in the daily papers.
3. Persistently insulting the association
both individually and collectively.
4. Consulting with irregular practitioners.
The charges were preferred by DR.. Thomas
and DR.. Seavey. DIR. Sanger is out in three
column letter in the Bangor Commercial in
his own defence. In answer to the hrst
charge he produces letter from DR.. II. f.
Tefft, the patient in question, in which Dr.
Tefft says he first went to the Office OF DIR.
Sanger and found him out. He then sent for
DIR. Thomas. Some days later he sent for DIR.
Thoms again but the latter replied that ne
could not come that day. He then sent for
DR.. Sanger and the latter from that time
treated his case Mr.. left says he did not in
form DIR. Sanger that he had previously had
DR.. Thomas.
To the second charge DR.. Sanger produces
note from the publishers of the Commercial
that they are accustomed to notice important
accidents and surgical operations without con-
sulting the wishes of the physicians, and that
in the Tefft case DIR. Sauger's opinion was
printed without his knowledge or consent.
DR.. Sanger then goes on to show by extracts
from the Commercial that the physicians who
ctn bfr,,o a1xrnc Axxra1l in,
glass houses. In July, 1875 an advertisement
in the Commercial notifies patients that they
lean avail themselves of the great skill and
experience of DR.. Seavey." In May, 1876, a
report of 3,474 cases of midwifery presided
over by DR.. Seavey, appeared in the same
paper with the added compliment to the Doc
tors skill that mot single woman had ever
died under his hands," In February, 1870, lit was
noted that DR.. Laughton had returned from
his visits to New York and Philadelphia hos
pitfalls for the treatment of the eye, ear and
throat. In 1878 it is recorded in the CONNER
cial'slcolumns that DIR Laughton assisted by DIR
Hamlin performed the difficult operation on
A. N. Fiske, of taking out the eye. DR. Sim
mons is convicted of advertising that he would
pay particular attention to diseases of the ear
and eye and skin.
To the third charge, that of insulting the
association individually and collectively DIR.
Sanger replies that he has hit back only when
first struck. He accuses several of his profess
SiOHdl Dr6turou VI luStlgdtlllS mdlprdCtlC6 SultS
against him and pursuing him in various other
ways,
In answer to the fourth charge, that of con-
sulting with irregular practitioners, DR.. Sanger
prints letters from three homeopathic physi-
clans in Bangor. DR.. Jefferds says that DR..
Sanger has never consulted with him, but that
in two cases of obstetrcal surgery and two of
accidents by his wish DR.. Sanger was employed.
DR.. Blaisdell says substantially the same thing
as DR.. Jefferds. DR.. Shepard says that he has
requested his patrons in few instances in
critical surgical cases to call DIR. Sanger. He
never called him in consultation. In one of
the cases where DIR. Sanger was called DIR.
Shepard says one of the physicians who was
witness to the complaint before the county So
ciety that DIR. Sanger was in the haoit of con-
sulting irregular practitioners, attempted a
surgical operation and failed.
There sis good prospect that the quarrel
will be brought up in the State Association at
its annual meeting, in which case we shall be
likely to hear some vigorous English.