The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1886-11-13
WTLLIFORD'S WILFULNESS
MADE PLAIN BY HIS OWN CON-
FESSI0N
That He Gave His Paper on "Anti-
pyIin" to the Appeal Reporter
for Publication.
To the Bditors of the Appeal.


Articles referring to the discussion
OF an ethical question at the last seq
sion Of the TrIstste Medical Assoca-
ton, published in the columns Of The
APPEAL and Avalanche, yesterday
morning, contain passages referring to
the part / took in the discussion,
which are calculated to do me an in
justice, aud to give the impression that
was the contentious party on the oc.
ca3ioD. Therefore beg space to ex.
plain the position i took at the time.
Early in the afternoon l introduced
a resolution asking the representatives.
OF the press, in making their reports,
to avoid mentioning names OF mem
bers OF the association, because it
would place the gentlemen whose
names were mentioned in an odious
attitude in their relations 10 their
brethren. introduced the resolution
because had seen in the APPEAL OF
that date an article on "AntipyriD,"
VIII Oh had been read before the Jciety
by Dr.. Wiliford on the day previous,
aud which the APPEAL reporter lauds
in these words: cone OF the papers
read the frat day was OF such
unusual merit that it attracted
the attention OF the APPEAL re-
porter, and he published it," DR..
Williford'd paper was very nicely
worded "resume" of his subject with
nothing new added but his indorse-
ment. The drug in question was in
troduced TO the profession more than
three years ago, and has bsen in gem
eral Ut @ in thu section more than two
years. All at once the reporter of the
APPEAL becomes convulsed at its
originality aud sacrifices his personal
friend, by taking down in short
hand (?) his paper and publishing it
verbatim. When / opened this cub
jet before the association / did it in
defense OF Dr.. Williiord and mads an
attack on the reporte! for placing this
gentleman in an unenviable attitude
before the profession. DR.. Henning,
acting as DR.. Williford's champion,
made statement, in which he pro-
duced the impre sion that he and
Wilhford came t. the conclusion, late
in the evening, that this reporter, hav-
ing been present, might possibly have
taken notes OF this paper and in mis-
taken interest in Williford's behalf
might publish something calculated to
place him in an awkward attitude be-
fore the medical brethren, ard
that they called upon the re-
porter late at night and asked
him not to print any comments on
this paper. The reporter told them
that he could not take the article out
without stopping the is ne OF the AP-
PEAL Later in the afternoon a COM
mittfe YVES appointed to examine DR..
Williford's conduct. This committee
called upon the reporter, who made a
written statement as Solemn as il he
was under OATH" in which he stated
that he alone wss responsible for the
appearance of the article, and that he
did it without DR.. Williford's knowl-
edge. The committee reported exon
Grating DR.. Wiliford. Notwithstand-
ing this the reporter, when l asked
him to explain come point, delivered
himself OF the following bit Of bril-
liancy:
He was not in the habit, he declared, of
making a speech every time he made a re-
port; did not tell how and whore he got his
Information, even TO grand iuries, and had
no idea of al lowing himself to be catechised
by an association OF doctors whose powers
wore considerably less than those of n grand
juryi but in this case Re had departed far
enough from his rule TO get his own con ent
to the writing Of a few lines whose purport
was that DR.. Williiord had nothing to do
with the publication OF the paper on "Anti-
pyrin," d I'd not ask it, but on the contrary,
objected. lie positively declined to BIO
catcchisod by DR.. Hyer or any one else.
II seems to mo that with such
clear conscience he was rather bashful
about talking, Possibly he was afraid
OF his own garlulity.
Now comes the interesting point
When DIR. WilifoTd Was earnestly ex-
planning he stated that he did give
his paper to tbs reporter, aud that the
reporter kept it more than one hour"
or quite long enough to make q copy
Of 1t. DR., Willford gave as his excuse
for so doing the fact that at the lime
tho paper was received the president
had rot as vet appointed a Committee
ON Publication. The reporter said
that he published the article without
bis (WillifoId's) knowledge and
against his protest. D.. Wiliford
stated that he gave him the paper.
There seems to be a COZ llict Of evil
dence in this case, with which we
have nothing to do, While some per-
cons may exclaim Save me from my
friends" we adopt as our motto "Fist
justitis, ruat Cnlum."
W. HYER, MD,