A letter to the Right Hon. Lloyd Lord Kenyon : Relative to some conduct of the College of Physicians of London, posterior to the decision of the Court of King's Bench in the case of Dr. Stanger; and containing observations on a principal ground of that decision / by William Charles Wells.

  • Wells, William Charles, 1757-1817.
Date:
1799
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: A letter to the Right Hon. Lloyd Lord Kenyon : Relative to some conduct of the College of Physicians of London, posterior to the decision of the Court of King's Bench in the case of Dr. Stanger; and containing observations on a principal ground of that decision / by William Charles Wells. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by Royal College of Physicians, London. The original may be consulted at Royal College of Physicians, London.

    45/150 (page 35)
    the labours, and enjoy the pleafures of life. I know not whether a fimilar infirmity has hi- therto been obferved in the mental perceptions of man; if it has not, I announce the exiftence of an undefcribed difeafe, and produce the con- du6t of Dr. Burges in proof of my difcovery. This gentleman, fome years ago, faw fo clearly the propriety of carrying into execution the bye-law of the college, for admitting licentiates to examination, that he propofed Dr. James Sims, as a candidate under it. To the other fellows, however, the propriety of the meafure was then involved in fuch darknefs, that no one of them could be induced to fecond his motion. In 1797, the arguments of the advocates of the college, and the fpeech of your lordfhip, diffufed fuch light over this fubjeA, that when another licentiate is propofed for examination, ten fel- lows, without the fmalleft folicitation from any perfon, and in dire A oppofitipn to the fuggef- tions of antient prejudice, declare their opinion, that it ought to be granted. But the light which now enables men of healthy minds to difcern merit in a meafure, in which thev formerly could fee none, overpowers by its excefs the infirm perception of Dr. Burges. In this diftrefs, groping in darknefs, he begs for time to con- fider, whether the bye-law for the examination F 2