The Washington herald., 1911-04-16
PHYSICIANS BILL
SUBJECT IN COURT
Claim of $500 Cut in Two
by a Jury.
HAD PERFORMED OPERATION
Presented Claim of $4OO to n. H.
barton, and Interesting Trial of
CInbnugh in the District Supreme
Court-Dr. Fry Refuses Statement.

A jury in the District Supreme Court,
after a elaboration OF twenty minutes.
decided that the bill of DR.. Henry D.
Fry for an operation performed on the
infant child Of n. H. barton, of this
city, was twice as much as should have
been asked. according TO the testimony
offered. The claim for the amount asked
was supported by the plea that as the
operation was a life-saving one, the re-
Enumeration for services given ought to be
in proportion to the value Of the life
saved.
The defendants in the case had re-
fused to pay the bill of $500, which, they
say. was first presented, on the ground
that It was an unreasonable charge for
the moderate services performed. DIR.
Fry then sued in the Municipal Court for
$500, and the defendants had the case
transferred to the District Supreme
Court for trial by jury. On April Il,
Chief Justice Clabaugh heard the case,
and the jury cut the reduced bill in two.
Fairness of the Bill.
Expert testimony was offered to sup
port the fairness of the bill by DR.. ]. r.
Wellington, of 172S Connecticut avenue,
and DR.. J. Thomas Kelley, jr.. of 1872
Fifteenth street, who stated that from
500 to $1,000 is a moderate fee for opera
tons involving abdominal incision. No
expert testimony was offered by the de-
PENDANTS. who stated they were unable
to find a physician willing to violate the
ethical code of their profession by testi-
fying against one of their fellows. While
the value of the services were admitted
ny the Dartons, 1t was maintained the
fec asked was unreasonably high when
the simplicity of the operation and the
length of time involved were taken into
consideration, as we'll as, they claimed
the oft-repeated statement of DR.. Fry
himself that the operation was not a
serious one.
The charge OF $780, afterward reduced
to S400 was made for an operation for
telescoping of the bowels performed on
an infant child at DR.. Fry's Sanatorium.
in October, 1909. This fee II is said, did
not include hospital charges Diagnosis
of the case was, 1t is reported, made by
DIR. S. S. Adams. attending physician,
who called in DR.. Fry. The defense
claimed that only an exploratory incision
was made, and that the condition which
this revealed was such as to require only
manipulation with the fingers, and that
no internal cutting was required The
whole operation, it was asserted did not
TAKE more Inan halr an hour.
Defendant in Case.
Il was the real defendant in this case"
said Mrs. Darton on being interviewed.
for my husband was away on official
business at the time and knew nothing
about the operation until the baby had
recovered. 1t was my mistake that no
contract was made beforehand, but that
Is an error any mans wife might make
under the circumstances. We felt that
$500 or $500 was not a just fee. In fact.
We were advised that 500 was ample
Our baby was brought home after a
week in the hospital and required no
more medical attention. Before the
oreration DR.. Fry stated repeatedly 1t
was not serious one. We inquired of
physicians and surgeons here and found
we could have had two of the leading
surgeons do this operation for from $50
to $50 So, you see, We felt justified in
protesting against $500 or 500 BILL
DR.. Fry was asked to give his side of
the story, but declined to make any
statement for publication IT to be quoted
in connection with it,