A letter addressed to James Syme, esq., Professor of Clinical Surgery, Edinburgh, in refutation of certain statements made both by him and others, his advocates, in relation to a case of stricture of the urethra, in which the operation of perineal section was performed / by Francis Burdett Courtenay.

  • Courtenay, Francis Burdett, 1811-1886.
Date:
1852
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: A letter addressed to James Syme, esq., Professor of Clinical Surgery, Edinburgh, in refutation of certain statements made both by him and others, his advocates, in relation to a case of stricture of the urethra, in which the operation of perineal section was performed / by Francis Burdett Courtenay. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    8/32 (page 8)
    of lowering me in the opinion of the profession and public, and offering me personal insult. Having thus assailed me, you will not, I presume, be surprised, if, whilst I carefully avoid dragging for- ward any antecedent and extraneous events which have occurred in your past career, and which in the eyes of some reflect no credit on you, I speak of your conduct in this transaction in unmistakable words, and with stern, uncompromising truth. With these introductory remarks, I, for the present, take my leave of all personal observations, and now proceed to the consideration of facts. As it is possible that this letter may fall into the hands of parties unacquainted with the full particulars of the case which is the subject of dispute, I shall, for their information and guidance to the formation of a truthful opinion, refer, as briefly as possible, to the history of the case, and the circumstances which occurred previous to the patient’s placing himself under your care. The patient whose case is the subject of discussion, first came under my care in the year 1842, when I learnt the following particulars of the case :—He was residing in India about sixteen years previous to my first seeing him, but in consequence of labouring under general ill health, besides symptoms of stricture, he returned to England, and placed himself under surgical treatment for the cure of the stricture. He, however, not only failed in obtaining the desired relief, but was made rather worse, and hence abandoned all treatment. In the year 1829, his sufferings were so great that he was compelled to seek further assistance, and applied to my late father, who afforded him considerable relief, by passing a bougie through the stricture to the bladder. Thinking he could himself finish the cure so successfully begun, he then returned home. From this time (1829) to 1839, he contented himself with merely passing a No. 4 bougie every month or six weeks. Now, however, he began to suffer severely from spasms and partial attacks of retention of urine after using the instruments, and he also frequently had attacks of rigors. His general health was likewise much disturbed. He, in consequence, applied to Dr. A. This gentle- man recommended that, as the use of the instruments produced