Palladium Of Virginia And The Pacific Monitor

My firm feeling and conscious innocence renders me secure from the diabolical torts of a desperado. Yes, I stand aloof, and all your calumny, and the venom emitted from the tongue of you, my traducer, will recoil upon yourself and consign you to infamy and disgrace.

But let us proceed to the charges in question, and see how you support them. The first charge is that of illiberality, which you fail to substantiate, and in your very lame attempt to make it out, pitch upon a case quite irrelevant to the point in question. Mr. Simpkins, his lady and their friends were fully aware of his danger for some time previous to his dissolution. I objected not, it is true, to their calling in additional aid though at a late period; because I knew, that, if I had, it might, with an appearance of truth, have been construed as arising from a spirit of selfishness and illiberality, and by no person, sooner than by yourself. "The case was not novel, neither anomalous, and as I did not greatly venerate, or highly esteem your medical skill, I did not propose you. But now does this case concern your side of the question? We presume it to be perfectly immaterial, as it respects the duty of a Physician, whether he be called late or early in a disease. How inconsistent do you prove yourself to be by your own tale? Your manner of bringing up this case is a silly effort to draw off the public notice from your improper conduct concerning it. How then does your charge stand? Your own representation clears me of selfishness and illiberality and charges them upon yourself.

Your second charge is that of obtrusion upon your professional business. Unfortunately for you, the case you cite not only proves me to be innocent, but even places me beyond suspicion. In this instance you set out in error and terminate in the same. By a plain, unvarnished statement of facts, the public mind will be informed and this matter forever laid to rest. During the illness of Mr. Harford I was asked one night at Mr. Callison's, by Mr. Wm. Johnston, if I would not pay Harford a friendly visit; to this I objected, and gave as my reason, that it might be construed as an interference with your practice. Shortly afterwards, on Tuesday Mr. George Johnston called on me and informed me Harford was without medical aid, as he understood that he felt interested for him and wished everything to be done; and concluded by requesting me to pay H. a professional visit, for which he would satisfy me. Mr. Wm. Johnston accompanied me. When we arrived there, I informed the family, by whose solicitation I came--that I did not wish to act unless agreeable: and then made some inquiries. Mrs. Harford told us you had given her husband out and ceased visiting him--that you had told her you were very willing they should call in any other assistance, and moreover that you had directed her to show the medicine he was using to whatever Physician was called. I enquired what medicines he was taking last, in order that I might act accordingly, and not from any sinister motive, as you assert and yet know to be untrue. The family appeared very willing I should act; and before my departure from the house, insisted on my coming back. After this information from the family, I did not presume that the most prejudiced mind would have judged me to be acting out of the sphere of my duty, by prescribing. I prescribed and left medicine, which by the way, you have misstated, as also my prescription. On the Sunday following being at Mrs. Johnston's, I asked Mr. Wm. Johnston to go to Harford's. When we entered the house, with the usual civilities; you were present but did not speak to either of us. After experiencing such illiberal and ungentlemanly treatment from you I did not choose to compromise my dignity by broaching the subject. After we had been seated some little time you arose and gave the customary parting salutation to those present with the exception of Johnston and myself. Notwithstanding, you acted in this low bred, vulgar manner I was so punctilious and conformed so strictly to medical etiquette, that I determined not to prescribe again for the patient, seeing you had resumed your attention to him. I accordingly would not prescribe, and the patient informed me he had determined not to take any medicine, as he was recovering. This determination, at once accounts for his not taking medicine, whether yours or mine, and refutes your insinuation that he was taking mine, because he thought I was interfering with your practice. This is a true history of the case as will appear from the certificates annexed. A development of the case therefore, on which you grounded your second charge instead of bearing you out, makes it recoil upon yourself and sinks you deeper and deeper in infamy.

Your third charge is that of ungentlemanly conduct, which comes with a very bad grace from a character so notorious as yours. This charge, like the rest, you have utterly failed to make out, as will appear from a cursory view of the facts. Whilst on my first visit to Mr. Dorman, he requested me to come again and see him. In consequence of this request, I called the next day, and not knowing what he wanted with me, asked him if he had any particular business, that he desired me to come. He informed me he had none, and that his request was, that I should occasionally visit him as a Physician. I called that evening with the expectation of meeting you and informing you of the request. While there, you came in, but your carriage towards me then, was similar to what it has since been at Harford's. Offended at your conduct, I did not then choose to inform you why I was still in attendance. Upon reflection, I concluded to call on you and inform you of it, that there might be no misunderstanding or surmising. I did so, and at the same time informed you, I had not interfered with the general treatment of the case, and that all I had ever prescribed was something of a simple nature. You said it had been told you, that I was interfering and prescribing medicines unauthorisedly, and you expressed yourself, that you did not believe I would act thus. I then gave you to understand, that, though requested, I would not act generally, but only visit him. That I did so will appear from the certificate of Mr. Dorman. As to the case of Hunter's Ben, your own suspicious and scandalous disposition led you astray. We once had an interview, and in the presence of Mal. McLaughlin and Capt. Cary and from the lips of Mr. Hunter himself, I proved to satisfaction my entire innocence in that case. To these gentlemen I refer for the truth of this statement. Any person acquainted with you, would take your conclusion to be ironical, if otherwise, it is ridiculous. A bacchanalian moralist is I suspect, very rigid and of consequence a strict conformist to the laws of his country. To review, it appears from facts, that you are guilty and I innocent, and yet that I am the accused and you the accuser. In the above and many other instances your conduct towards me has been of the most ungentlemanly, illiberal and disgusting kind. I have now satisfied the public, I hope, of the falsity of your charges, and with them rest the decision of the matter. From your known character I expected such treatment and still expect it. But in conclusion, I would remark to you that your charges and insinuations are of little effect, and that your word is similar to counterfeit coin not passable where known.

R. H. HENRY.

Oct. 12th 1825

CERTIFICATES

I do hereby certify, that the above statement, made by Dr. Henry, in the case of Henry Harford is correct so far, as I was concerned, and as the facts alluded to occurred in my presence.

WM. JOHNSTON

I Henry Harford do certify that Mr. Wm. Johnson, came to see me, while I lay sick, on the same day Dr. Simpkins had been here, had given me out and had told us to obtain any other medical assistance we could. That Mr. Wm. Johnston and Dr. Henry, came on the next Tuesday and that the Doctor informed us by whom he had been requested to come. Mrs. Harford then informed him, that Dr. Simpkins had given me out, and told her, he was very willing for us to obtain any other medical assistance, and moreover that Dr. Simpkins had directed her to show the medicine I had been taking to whatever Physician was called in; and accordingly she showed him some of the medicine. Dr. Henry left me medicine, part of which I took. And that I quit taking medicine, because I had determined not to take any from any person, and not that I thought Dr. Henry had interfered with Dr. Simpkins' practice in my case.

HENRY HARFORD SEAL.

I do hereby certify the above statement is correct.

SARAH HARFORD SEAL.

I do hereby certify, that Dr. Henry did not prescribe any medicine worth notice for me, neither did he interfere in the least with Dr. Simpkins, in his general course of treatment to my case. Dr. Henry came down several times to my house, during my illness; sometimes on business of his own and again to see me. I requested him to come down when convenient, &c. &c.

JOHN DORMAN.