Dr Gregory's defence.

  • Gregory James, 1753-1821.
Date:
[1808]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Dr Gregory's defence. Source: Wellcome Collection.

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

    10/502 (page 6)
    in those sentiments which I had expressed with respect to the principles of moral conduct, or in my mode of reasoning, and in the inferences which I had drawn from those things which I had con- sidered and stated as matters of fact. (The single exception, to which I here allude, is with respect to a supposed mistake of mine in what I had stated in the 17th page of my Review, that we, the opposers of Dr Spens’s motion in 1796, for repealing in part our enactment of 1754, were a great majority. Dr Stewart told me, in the end of January, or beginning of February 805, that Dr Spens had assured him that I was mistaken on that point; and that he had a majority in his favour. I am by no means convinced that I was mistaken; but it may be so: and I must ac- knowledge, that I expressed myself too confidently and rashly on a point, with respect to which it is plain, even from my own words in that passage of my Review, that I could have only conjecture or opinion. But that very rashness or confidence, is a proof that I spoke and acted bona jide on that occasion. As it is a point quite unconnected with my Defence against the specific charge brought against me, I wave all further discussion of it at present. But as soon as I shall have leisure to write, for the edification of my bre- thren, a complete vindication of my conduct towards this College, I shall consider it fully ; and shall then state my reasons for not per- secuting Dr Spens, by urging him to any explanations with respect to it.) The other negative proposition, which I do most solemnly assert, is this:—That no attempt has been made by any of my brethren to call me to account, or to get me censured, or punished in any way, for any supposed wilful falsehood, or for any wrong done to them, in any of the strong assertions (in my Review and Censorian Letter) with respect to their breach of faith, chicane, and falsehood.