Reply to the "Additional strictures" contained in the first number of the Quarterly medical review, on the Principles of dental surgery : exhibiting a new method of treating the teeth and gums, especially calculated to promote their health and beauty, &c. / by Leonard Koecker.

  • Koecker, Leonard, 1785-1850.
Date:
1827
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Reply to the "Additional strictures" contained in the first number of the Quarterly medical review, on the Principles of dental surgery : exhibiting a new method of treating the teeth and gums, especially calculated to promote their health and beauty, &c. / by Leonard Koecker. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    3/40
    TO THE “ ADDITIONAL STRICTURES,” &c. &c. &c. Toward the end of last year, I published the u Princi¬ ples of Dental Surgerya work which immediately at¬ tracted the attention of the profession, as was sufficiently evinced by the extensive notice it met with in the periodi¬ cals. Its reception, generally speaking, was highly flatter¬ ing, and assuredly yielded me no small gratification ; gra¬ tification, however, which, like all terrestial blessings, was not without alloy—some portion of ungenerous and un¬ handsome treatment. All the criticisms of the reviewers, with a single exception, whether ill or well founded, I received, not only with calmness, but even with compla¬ cency ; persuaded that they sprung from the best motives, and were intended for the advantage of society, for the promotion of accurate Dental knowledge, and for my es¬ pecial good in any future edition of my volume. The exception to which I have just alluded, is contained in the first number of u The Quarterly Medical Review,”— (u being a New Series of the Quarterly Journal of Foreign Medicine and Surgery,”) which was published last January. In this periodical, the u Principles of Dental Surgery” are reviewed in very handsome terms, evidently by some contributor; and, the Editor himself, in a note, alludes to “ the general merits of the volume.” But that gentleman has thought proper—and I by no means blame him for having so done—to admit a tail-piece to the regular review, under the head, “ Additional Strictures on Mr. Koecker's Work—strictures avowedly written by a professional Dentist, and, I believe, a practitioner in London. It is of the unfairness of these strictures that I complain, and to their refutation that I have chiefly devoted the following reply. A note was sent with a proposal to publish it in the next number of the Quarterly Medical Review, but, from the nature of the answer, there seemed great uncertainty whether it might be accepted. I therefore determined ta give it to the public in the form of a pamphlet. B