The daily gazette. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1874-1883, 1881-04-19
A MEDICAL WRANGLE.
DISPUTE OF THE DOCTORS AT LORD
BEACoNsFIELD's BEDSIDE.
LONDON. April I6.

l
versy which has arisen from Lor,
Beaconsfeld's illness may be toll,
as follows DIR. Kidd, Lord Bea
consfeld's regular physician for tn,
last four years, was reputed to be ,
hom9path. A short time ago thu
Queen intimated that other medica
advisers should be called in. ST.
William Jenner was sent for, ant
he, after consulting with Sir William
Gull, refused to attend, alleging tn,
impossibility for practitioner o
scientific medicine to meet person
protesting the principles of homeo-
| patty, adding that he did not thinl
Lord Beaconsield's interest coult
in any way be served by consulta
ton. On the contrary, he thought
it could not be without risk to the
patient. Thereupon Lord Barring
ton, at Lord Beaconsfeld's request
called upon DR.. Quain, who replies
that it would afford HIM extreme
qualification, but he did not see how
his professional services would be
useful, inasmuch as DIR. Kidd was q
homeopathic practitioner. DIR.
Quain sought the advice of Sir
George Burrows, ex-president of the
College of Physicians. On reference
to a medical directory it was found
that DIR. Kidd was qualified medi-
cal practitioner. Sir George Bur-
rows then expressed his opinion to
DR.. Guam that if DR.. Kidd, being
thus qualified, were not treating
Lord Beaconsfield otherwise than on
rational principles DIR. Quian would
not be justified in refusing to attend.
EcLEoTIoIsM.
Whereupon DR.. Quain wrote to Dir :.
Kidd, asking him to state bis method OF
treatment. DR.. Kidd replied that he
was in the habit of treating his patients
as other praetitio ners did, with pharma-
copoeical remedies in ordinary pharma-
copoeieal doses and applying the princi-
pals OF scientific medicines, although he
did not feel preeluded from using in his
practice the so-called homeopathic rem.
edIes which In his experience he had
( .und useful in the treatment Of disease.
DR.. Kidd put this In writing adding 81
beg to say that am not treating Lord
Beasonsfield Geographically. beg
further to assure you that every pre-
scription OF yours will be faithfully car
ried out by me-" Armed with this DIR.
Quain visited Sir r. Bennett, president
Of the College Of Physicians, who agreed
that DR.. Quain ought to attend Lord
Beaconsfield. Thenceforward the two
doctors wol ked harmoniously. Respect
ing their treatment of the patient DR..
Kidd writes DIR. Quain, upon receiv
ing my assurance that was acting ON
the ordinary principles of medicine, aud
not geographically visited the patient,
thus affirming the spirit OF that boast OF
the medical profession which In the
hour of sickness recognizes only human
ity in need of succor. In this way DR..
Quain and / did not work together
without being agreed nor did either of
us sacrifice HE convictions TO effect the
cooperation. On the contrary, Dir.
Quain's great skill was thus made use-
full to our illustrious patient, and my
intimate knowledge of his constitution
and Of his disease was as helpful to DIR.
Quain." DIR. Quain was equally loud
in his praise Of DIR. Kidd, who was
thoroughly acquainted with the history
of the case.
PHYSICIANS IN COUNCIL.
Nevertheless the incident has caused
great excitement among the profession.
On the 18th inst, at q meeting held at
The College OF Physicians, DIR. Quain
was asked to explain his conduct. His
answer Is recorded In the above nara
tive. Dr.. Quain justifies his conduct by
saying thai having been placed in posi-
ton of great dlfticulty,he had been called
upon to perform duty In which he felt
that his decision must be of considerable
Importance TO the profession and might
be of vital interest TO the patient and
public; but he bad acted according to his
clear sense of duty and from no other
motive. DR.. Kidd thus explains his
position:-"Although repuJed homoeo-
path desire once for all to disclaim
any such party designation. Six years
ago | resigned all connection with the
homeopathic hospital and society. In a
very extensive practice, extending over
thilty-four years, have always adopted
that course of treatment which my own
study and experience have taught me to
be most effectual to my patients. Herein
10Y Si@hh W h0fIb5 aStSu 40 onJ hihh
does who is not bound by the trammels
of merely mechanical routine. Like
other practitioners, use the drugs of the
British Pharmacopoeia, but in many
cases have learned from experience that
what are called homeopathic remedies
may be usefuliy prescribed. Such
remedies freely use in suitable cases
and according to my own judgment. l
do not prescribe infinitesimal doses, nor
do prescribe according to the caprice OF
my patients"
COMMON SENSE.
DR.. Kidd thHs concludes his letter of
xplanation:-s'Ast to rules of profession
al etiquette which have been alleged
herein to have been violated, it Is i'm
possible within the limits of this letter
to discuss the entire question, but l am
convinced that If the boast of the medical
profession above set forth 10 henceforth
to remain living principle of conduct,
we must be guided not by the misleading
flicker OF prejudice and jealousy bat rath-
er by the clear, convincing light OF
humanity and common sense.n T0rtun-
ately at the time this controversy was co.
ing on the noble patients condition was
not so dangerous as atterWard became.
Not that it is supposed Lord Beacsns-
field had not the most skIlful attendance
but had this not been the case 1t appears
to be dogma of the profession, as ex-
pounded by SIR William Jenner and Sir
William that sooner should the patient