History of the expulsion of Drs. R.S. Newton and Z. Freeman from the Eclectic Medical Institute : with the causes which rendered it necessary, and an exposition of the slanderous and factious course which has been pursued by the off-casts from the Institute / by W. Sherwood.

  • Sherwood, Wm. (William)
Date:
[1856?]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: History of the expulsion of Drs. R.S. Newton and Z. Freeman from the Eclectic Medical Institute : with the causes which rendered it necessary, and an exposition of the slanderous and factious course which has been pursued by the off-casts from the Institute / by W. Sherwood. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by the National Library of Medicine (U.S.), through the Medical Heritage Library. The original may be consulted at the National Library of Medicine (U.S.)

    1/32
    ' HISTORY OF THE EXPULSION V, DRS. K. S. NEWTON AND Z. FREEMAJSUl^ •yj.l; o /iij /!, , ^-»«— FROM THE - •> ^ tTuf iL J' ECLECTIC MEDICAL INSTITUTE. With the causes which rendered it necessary, and an exposition of the slanderous and factious course which has been pursued by th/'off-casts from the Institute. BY W. For several years past, a feeling of dissatisfaction with the professional conduct and capacities of Dr. R. S. Newton has been steadily increasing among the Faculty, students and graduates of the Eclectic Medical Institute. Every member of the Faculty had more than once expressed, privately, to his col- leagues his dissatisfaction with Dr. Newton, as a professor, disapprobation of his course, and a convic- tion of the necessity of opposing his machinations. Three members of the Faculty, (Drs. Bickley, King and Sherwood) had threatened a resignation of their posts, on account of their dissatisfaction with his character as a colleague ; and one (Dr. Bickley) had actually written his resignation on that account, but subsequently witheld it. In addition to this dis- satisfaction, which at times threatened the disor- ganization of the Faculty, Dr. Newton himself, from personal enmity, pursued a course of public and private warfare against Dr. Cleaveland, and en- deavored (notwithstanding he could find no fault with him as a faithful and able teacher) to procure his rejection from his chair, by the Board of Trustees. It was evident, therefore, that Dr. Newton's con- tinuance in the Faculty, even if he had been com- petent to discharge his duties in a superior manner, was incompatible with the permanence and pros- perity of the College, and that a dissolution would be inevitable. This discord was brought to a crisis by the attempt of Dr. N. to overthrow the entire Faculty. He was hostile to Dr. King, because Dr. K. re- fused to allow his [Newton's] name to appear any longer in the American Eclectic Dispensatory as joint author of a work to which he had not con- tributed a line, nor bad then seen a single page, and because Dr. King charged him with endeavor- ing to defraud him of the copy-right, and declined any longer to bolster up Dr. Newton's literary pre- tensions, by writing matter to appear under his (Dr. N'sJ name. He was hostile to Dr. Cleaveland, because that gentleman refused to recognize adulterated medi- cines, proved such by chemical analysis, as worthy of heing recommended to the medical class: and because he denounced the fraud as it deserved. He was hostile to Drs. Buchanan, Hoyt and myself, because we would not co-operate with him in making war upon Drs. King and Cleaveland, and because, like our associates, we disapproved of much of his conduct, and considered the manage- ment of the clinic unsatisfactory, and not in accord- ance with his promises. He was bitterly hostile to Drs. Cleaveland and King, because they sometimes privately expressed their true opinions, or rather knowledge of his scientific deficiencies as a Pro- SHERWOOD, M. D. mm—Mwwnw > fessor. Dr. Freeman alone was tolerated by him, as he had been induced by self-interest to co-operate with Dr. N. Under these circumstances a conspiracy was form- ed by Dr. Newton, with At* inveterate enemy, L. E. Jones, during the Winter and Spring of 1855-56, to gratify their common malice against the Faculty, and remove the old Board of Trustees. It was true that Dr. L. E. Jones despised Dr. New- ton more heartily than any other member of the Faculty, and that Dr. N. reciprocated his feelings with interest; but he knew that Dr. L. E. J. was willing to co-operate with him for revenge, while he supposed the Faculty would submit no longer to his presence. Hence, the combination was formed to unite their votes in the April election, remove the old Board of Trustees and Faculty, and place in their stead Drs. Newton, Jones, Baldridge, <tc, as Trustees and Professors. The conspiracy was carried out—but the conspir- ators had not enough of stock to carry the election. New stockholders took stock at par, for the benefit of the Institute, and voted for the old Board, thus, defeating the conspirators, whose purchase of stock below par, at a heavy discount, for the purpose of controlling the election, did not avail them. Never- theless, they pretended to have carried the election, proceeded to organize themselves as a Board of Trustees, and instituted legal proceedings to obtain possession, and to enjoin the Faculty and Trustees from further action. They were twice defeated in the Superior Court, after disturbing greatly the pro- gress of the session, by their factious litigation, and then resorted to mob violence, broke into the College building at night, and held possession, by a force of armed men. In which position they continue the contest, until the result can be legally decided and their possession terminated bylaw. When this course was adopted, the Board of Trustees did what should have been done some years since—expelled Dr. Newton and his accessory Dr. Frecmnn. after giving them repeated opportunities to defend them- selves from the charges preferred by the Faculty. The members of the Faculty declined to engage in a riotous contest with the mobocrats, for the sake of a few week's occupation of their Hall, and con- tinued their lectures, in another hall, to the close of the session; attended by all of the class, except a few individuals, who had been seduced or deceived by Drs. Newton and Freeman, and who attended their lectures at the clinical lecture room. Since the end of the session an incessant publi- cation and circulation of the most extravagant false- hoods, and the most malicious slanders throughout our country, has been kept up by Dr. Newton 1