« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
1. If your name has been placed under the wrong heading.'
2. If it has been credited to the wrong county or to more than one county.
3. If it has appeared more than once in the same county-list.
6. If you know of names that have been omitted in any of the several county-lists, give each name in full, P. O. address, town and county.
7. If you know of any practitioner, whose name appears in this catalogue, who has not received it.
8. If you know of any to be dead whose name is in this catalogue, give the date of his death.
The above are suggestions of possible errors. If you find such, or any other mistakes, be so kind as to communicate the fact without delay, by letter or postal-card, to the Corresponding Secretary, Dr. J. W. S. GOULEY, 324 Madison Avenue, New York City.
You may keep this proof as a useful register, to date, of the vote of the profession on the codes of ethics.
In sending corrections, please give your P. O. address, town and county.
If no response is received from you in the course of ten days from the above date, it will be inferred that you have no corrections to offer, and your name will stand as it now is in the forthcoming issue of the corrected catalogue.
Corrections will be thankfully received also from secretaries of county societies.
COUNCIL: Abram Du Bois, Austin Flint,
Austin Flint, Jr., J. W. S. Gouley, John H. Hinton, Samuel T. Hubbard, William T. Lusk, Samuel S. Purple,
T. Gaillard Thomas.
A copy of this proof will be sent for correction to every member of the profession whose name and address are printed in the catalogue.
Thus, every one interested in this question had ten (10) days' time to make such corrections as he might wish to make, in all fairness. Therefore, those who have failed to offer corrections should not find fault with the corrected catalogue which was issued a few days ago. The corrections received were scrupu. lously noted, and all vouchers have been filed. Let us now look at the figures as they stand in the proof and in the corrected catalogue.
1 The headings are, National Code, “New Code,” No Code, Unclassified, Uncommitted. The unclassified are those who have been heard from but have not signified exactly where they stand. The uncommitted have not been heard from.
The proof is found to contain the names of ...... ... 5,219 Since the appearance of the proof, new names have come in to the number of.....
Which number, added to the original, gives a total of..... 5,286 Since the beginning of the canvass there have died.
5,203 A number of names have been stricken off the proof, the
majority on account of removal from the State, a few
I need not here state.
201 Leaving a total (which is given in the corrected catalogue) of.......
5,002 Number of those who have not expressed their preference. 1,142
It is evident from these figures that there is a majority for the National Code over the whole number of committed and uncommitted. That there is a majority of more than two thirds for the National Code over the “New Code," and a nearly two thirds majority for the National Code over the “New Code," No Code, and Unclassified combined.
It is now proper that you should know how stands the vote in the State Society ; and here let me say that, although we have a
majority, our adherents will do as they have done before-stay away-and we shall be out-voted. I doubt much if on Tuesday night we poll more than one hundred votes. According to the Transactions of 1883, the State Society has thirty-three retired members, who are not entitled to vote, and should have 386 voting members and delegates ; but I can not count more than 382.
Of these there are for the National Code.....
193 134 19 36
In spite of our manifest majorities, the “New-Code" party is still endeavoring to make it appear that we are in the minority, although they have had ample opportunity to make corrections in our catalogue, a copy of the proof having been mailed to every one whose name and address appeared therein.
Now, gentlemen, that you have before you these facts and figures, I leave you to decide what measures it may be wise for this assembly of representative men to take.
After some remarks upon the report just given, Dr. E. D. FERGUSON, of Rensselaer County, moved that all the members and delegates present in Albany, who are in favor of the re-enactment of the National Code, be requested to attend the meeting of the State Society on Tuesday evening, for the purpose of protesting, by their vote, against the action taken by the Society in substituting the “New” for the National Code, and of endeavoring to secure the re-enactment of the National Code.
Dr. Thomas F. ROCHESTER, of Erie County, seconded the resolution, and said that the members and delegates would fail in their duty if they did not present this protest.
DR. Austin Flint, Jr., of New York County, said :
MR. CHAIRMAN AND GENTLEMEN OF THE CONVENTION : It is more than a year since I have publicly spoken to an audience of friends on the questions which have at last divided the medical profession of the State of New York. As you all well know, thus far the battle-field in the warfare against the honor and dignity
of the profession has been mainly in the city of New York. In the city of New York, the conspiracy, which has brought about the deplorable conflict that has been forced upon us, had its inception. The attack upon the most sacred traditions of our profession was there made with a malignant rancor that can only be fully appreciated by those who have been personally involved in this unhappy contest. I say it in all modesty, but we of the city of New York come before you as veterans from the front, bearing
If we venture to offer suggestions with regard to future action, if we beg you to learn a lesson from our own experience, it is because we are unhappily too familiar with the arrogance and the unscrupulous methods of our enemies within the profession. Our experience teaches us that but one course is now open to those who are unwilling to remain in the false and humiliating position in which we are placed. The proper course is for us to organize a new State Association, to be composed exclusively of those who refuse to countenance professional relations with irregular practitioners.
We all know the signification of the term irregular practitioner of medicine. It is not necessary to define it. We all know that no physician can be true to his calling and manhood and yet be willing to meet as a professional brother a charlatan or one who practices medicine under a dishonest designation.
The conspiracy which culminated in the adoption of the “New Code” by the State Society first made its appearance in the medical law of 1880, although its secret history is of a much earlier date. Many practitioners of more or less standing in the profession have long chafed under the restraints imposed upon them by our code of ethics. It is an almost unavoidable logical conclusion that the prominent advocates of the “New Code were not content to confine themselves to consultation with their "regular" brethren, but yearned for the temporal advantages to be gained by consulting with any and all practitioners who could or would bring them patients. It seemed easy to bring this about if they could find a cloak for their action in the laws of the State, and could assume that they were not at liberty to refuse to consult with any practitioner formally recognized by such laws. It became necessary, then, to be able to point to a distinct definition of a legally qualified practitioner. This they were enabled to do by
referring to the law of 1880, which was drawn by one who is now an earnest supporter of the “New Code.” By the law of 1880, certain irregular practitioners, after complying with the prescribed conditions of registration, are recognized as legally qualified medical men. This being accomplished, the “New Code,” which permits consultations with all legally qualified practitioners, was forced through the State Society, by methods which are known to us all. In my belief, the conspiracy, from its inception many years before 1880 to its culmination in the existing division of the profession of the State, has been carried on mainly in the city of New York; and this has been the work of a few bold and active men.
The profession of the city of New York began to realize the enormity of the action taken by the State Society, at a meeting of the Medical Society of the County of New York, held a few weeks before the meeting of the State Society, in 1883. The question came up at this meeting of the County Society; and the leader of the “New Code” movement, supported by a large number of adherents who blindly followed his dictation, displayed a degree of arrogance and assumption that has seldom, if ever, been witnessed in such a body. Many voices were raised in defense of the honor of the profession, but they were unheeded. One of the most eminent men in our ranks, respected alike for his age, attainments, and the purity of his professional and private life, was merely tolerated in making his protest ; while the curt and peremptory orders of the “New Code” leader, to vote in a certain way on each question raised, were received with stormy applause and were implicitly obeyed. The disgust and alarm of the upholders of the National Code, however, were brought to a culmination by the appearance of the President of the New York Academy of Medicine, who, in a long speech, advocated the breaking down of the time-honored barriers which have heretofore separated the regular profession from charlatans.
Following this meeting of the County Society, three physicians of the city of New York, after consulting together with regard to the proper action to be taken, associated with themselves six others, the nine constituting the council of an organization “to uphold the National Code of Ethics." The Council afterward established what was called the “ Central Organization,” under the