DOCTORS DIFFER.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1445, 22 December 1885, Page 2

DOCTORS DIFFER.

TO THE EDITOR. Beware of entrance to a quarrel— But, being in, Bear't that the opposed may beware of • thee. Hamlet. Sir,— Kindly grant me space in your columnri to make a few remarks about the late unseemly fracas that took plac* at the Po.-t-office last week between Dr Campbell and myself, I should have rej frainer! from taking any further notice of the tiK.t'er had [ not discovered that reports of an erroneous nature and prejudicial to myself were in active circulation by Dr C-nnpbell as to my part in the aff.iir. I eball relate briefly the ficti of the case. Some time ago I was sent for late in the evening to attend an accident to one of my patients. I was absent from home at. the time, and Dr Campbell was called in in the emergency. Heariog on my return that he was in attendance I left the case in his hands. On Sunday, the 13th inst., a messenger came down tor me to attend the case ; I went, examined the patient and die-sed the wound. At my patient's rpqnett, and in comformitv with medical etquette, I wrote a note to Dr Campbell to apprise him of the fact that I was in attendance. The following is, from memory, the note: — Temuka, 13th Dec, 1885. SIR, —I have to thank you for your attendance on my patient, Miss -—, asd to inform you that you will not be required to call again, as I have taken over the management of the case. —Yours, etc., J. S. Hatbs. On receipt of this note Dr Campbell behaved in a most extraordinary manner, calling no less than three times on the patient (who, by the way, had no male protect >r) and Biibjwted her to a great deal of annoyance—begging to be allowed to attend, although told that I was their medical attendant and had been [so for years. I miy mention that while in attendance 1 made no remark whatever on Dr Campball'a qualifications, nor was 1

asked wh>;t they were. Dr Campbell seems to have been much exercised in his mind about the nutter, and openly stated his intention of " having a row " with me, or "goingfor me," or words to that effect. On Thursday last at the Post-office, in the presence of a lady with whom L had just been conversing, he accosted me excitadly, and said " 1 hear you have questioned my qualifications." I denied the charge, when, without asking 'an explanation, he called me " a liar." Not wishing to make a " scene " in the public street, J. replied "You had better be careful, I will not allow you to call me a liar." Ha then went into the Postoffice, and in the hearing of the officials there called me " a liar and a coward." I walked up to him and asked him -vhnt he meant by that, remarking " Thank God, lam not a lunatic." He thereupon exclaimed " I'm ready for you," and struck me with his closed fist. There was then no help for it, and I returned the blow with interest (although I fait keenly the disgrace of being drawn iuto a street fight). Being the aggressor, he has only himself to thank for what he received. When the fight commenced I called the spectators to witness that Dr Campbell was the aggressor and not I. It has subsequently come to my knowledge that Dr Campbell has related quite a differeiit version to the above : statiug, among other things, that " I attacked him unawares, threw him down, and struck him before he recovered from the effects ot the fall." This is quitd untrue. The imputation of unfairness is rother on the othor side : for once, while he was on the ground, he, in a cowardly manner, seized me by the leg and attempted 10 throw me.

I have penned the above solely to vindicate myself from unwarranted and untrue imputations. It is a monstrous tiling that a man should be publicly assaulted and unwillingly compelled to become a principul in a street fight, and afterwards be vilified by cahumnous insinuations.

I have no desire to take legal ac*ion against Dr Campbell, but shall most cer Wnly do so, for my own justification, if T . find that he still continues to spread versions of the affiir which exist only in his own imagination. Another aspect of the case worth a passing notice is the undoubted right of p.itinnt3 to choose their own medical advisers, without being subjected to molestation and annoyance.—l am, etc., J. S. Hayes, M.D. Temuka, 21? t Dec. 18*5. . \

* TO THE EEITOR. Sib, —I was great'y disappointed, and 1 may say disgusted, to find that you would not repoit the sanguinary conflict, between iSayers and Heenan that took plnce in Tamuka on Saturday last, especially as I am given to understand that you were one of the bottleholdera, and even lost your hat in your arduous efforts to Keep them at it. It seems to me a disgraceful thing that you, who we (the public) look up to as our reporter of all that takes place in the County of Geraldine, should have been bought over to suppress facts, especially as you were an eyewitness of (he combat. And you ought to consider how enormously it would increase the circulation of your valuable paper if you had described the encounter in the same humorous style that you used when the the Wonderful Cow was agitating the public mind. But now you will linye to consider how many of us will have to withdraw our patronage of such a valuable local industry, and I feel compelled to say that one will be. M. Mauvais Jambon.

N. B.—l would suggest, as you have been the means of deceiving so many of the backbone and sinew of the country by not reporting this transaction, that you should engage the Volunteer Hall and explain your regions for neglecting your duty. If you do not, myself with a large number of your influential supporters intend to engage the hall to impeach you. [Sweet M. Jambon, things are developing nicely. Gire litem time.—The Editor.]