The semi-weekly miner. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1882-1886, 1885-06-13
DOCTORS
The Suit of Bishop & Beeson VS..
John w. Hunter.

Yesterday, Judge French, acting in his
capacity as Justice OF the Peace, had rather
a prOtracted hearing, the case being Bishop
e. Beeson VS.. John w. Hunter, the plain
tiffs, who are physicians, claiming 500 for
professional services rendered the deceased
wife of defendant. The doctors were at
tended by Messrs. Smith. Walsh and Me
Hatton as attorneys and Messrs. Dew!1t
and Bach defended the suit. A jury trial
was demanded and the following gentlemen
were accepted on the panel: Henry Nichols,
G. G. Leford, Simon Hauswirth, Fred Gil
bert, John Tudor and James Ryan. The
court room was crowded with witnesses
and interested spectators who had been at
tracted by the novelty of the suit, the ex-
pectation being that the gu ostion OF medi-
cal practice, if not medical ethics would be
on trial. The witnesses for the prosecution
were the two plaintiffs, and the defense had
subpenaed, in addition to Mr.. Hunter,
Mrs. Charity Miles, Mrs. Hannah Dale, Mrs.
Jane Green, DIR. Thomas Carroll and DIR.
F. Hitler.
The testimony was lengthy and as a
whole unimportant, and the unseemly
sparring of words between the counsel at
times threatened to degenerate a serious
matterinto afarce. Briefly stated, the case,
according to the testimony, was a%sfollows:
Mrs. Hunter, the wife OF the defendant, was
about to be confined several weeks ago
and DIR. BeesOn was called in to attend
her. After the birth OF the child the mother
rapidly declined, and after calling in DR..
Bishop for a consultation it was decided
that the patient was suffering from dilita-
ton of the heart and dropsy, and she was
treated accordingly, the physicians deciding
that the best they could do was to sustain
the heart and consequently life, although
there was no hope for the recovery OF the
lady. At this point DR.. Hitler was called
in and he at once made up his mind that
the case had been improperly diagnosed,
and that capillary bronchitis was the dis
ease from which the patient was suffering.
Upon hearing this Mr.. Hunter discharged
DR.. Beeson and employed DIR. Hitler, but the
change was Of no avail, as the lady died a
few days afterwards Subsequently Bishop
& Beeson presented a bill OF .5a iur pro-
fessional services, and the payment was
promptly and positively refused; hence the
suit.
The defense did not attempt to assaif the
mode of treatment but claimed that the
case had been improperly diagnosed, and
that consequently the plaintiffs were not
entitled to ecover. The testimony with
the exception of that of several ladies whit
testified to the proper nursing OF the
deceased was purely of a medical character,
and would be unintelligible to the average
reader, suffice it to say that the complain
ants and DR.. Hitler differed radically as to
the location and nature of the disease AND
neither Of them lost an opportunity OF at
tempting to convince the jury that they
were in the right. At 6 o'clock all the testi-
mony being in, Mr.. Smith IN behalf Of the
prosecution offered to submit the case
without argument, but this being declined
by the opposition the court adjourned and
the arguments will be made this morning.