Glish Language: in which the words are deduced from their originals in their different significations by examples from the best writers, 2nd edn (1756), 2 vols, vol. 2, 1110.80ibid.,Social HistoryVOL.39 :NO.Nor was it only Scarlett whose presence evoked the broader confrontation between Tulathromycin A biological activity political authority and popular liberty. The presiding judge was none other than the Lord Chief Justice, Charles Abbott, Lord Tenterden, a man who owed his recent elevation to the peerage to Scarlett’s political influence. A high Tory who, as a student at Oxford, had written a prize-winning essay on the `Use and abuse of satire’, Tenterden had presided over some of the most order (��)-Zanubrutinib notorious political trials of the age, including those of William Hone, T. J. Wooler, Richard Carlile, Francis Burdett and the Cato Street conspirators.81 Throughout the proceedings Wakley and Scarlett adopted two distinct and opposed rhetorical strategies. In keeping with his political agenda, Wakley sought to focus attention on the broader implications of Cooper’s alleged incompetence. He began his opening address by elaborating a vision of medicine as a form of public service. Guy’s Hospital, he insisted, was an `institution of very great importance’, not only as a charity but also because of its medical school, whose students would eventually practise throughout the length and breadth of the country. `Hence it is of utmost importance to the public welfare that the practice inculcated should be safe, and scientific, and . . . calculated to promote the interests of the public’.82 The rest of his case endeavoured to establish that, because of the nepotistic system by which Cooper had come to occupy his post, this was not the case and that The Lancet had acted in the public interest by exposing his inabilities. Most of Wakley’s witnesses had been present at the operation and were there to confirm the details of the procedure, with most affirming that they `never saw an operation performed so unscientifically and in such a bungling manner’.83 Yet even with such specific questioning, Wakely endeavoured, as far as was possible, to keep the wider political issue in view, often to Lord Tenterden’s consternation. For example, during the questioning of Alderman Partridge, a surgeon from Colchester, the following exchange took place: Mr Wakley. Do you believe, taking all the circumstances into consideration that Mr Cooper performed the operation in a scientific manner? No, I could not say I thought he did, certainly. Do you believe the operation was performed in a manner in which the public have a right to expect such an operation ought to be performed by a surgeon of Guy’s Hospital? Lord Tenterden. He does not know the meaning of that, ?what the public have a right to expect! Was it performed with proper skill? One hardly knows what the public have a right to expect. Mr Wakley. That is charged, my Lord. Lord Tenterden. Yes, I believe it is, ?I see it is. You have a right to put the question. Mr Wakley. Do you think the operation was performed in a manner the public have a right to expect from a surgeon of Guy’s Hospital? That operation? That operation? No, I do not.M. Lobban, `Abbott, Charles, first Baron Tenterden (1762 ?832)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Oxford, 2004).81Wakley, Report of the Trial, op. cit., 15 ?6. 33. 84ibid., 19 ?0.83ibid.,MayThe Lancet, libel and English medicineWakley’s most audacious move, and the one which most answered his political purpose, was his sum.Glish Language: in which the words are deduced from their originals in their different significations by examples from the best writers, 2nd edn (1756), 2 vols, vol. 2, 1110.80ibid.,Social HistoryVOL.39 :NO.Nor was it only Scarlett whose presence evoked the broader confrontation between political authority and popular liberty. The presiding judge was none other than the Lord Chief Justice, Charles Abbott, Lord Tenterden, a man who owed his recent elevation to the peerage to Scarlett’s political influence. A high Tory who, as a student at Oxford, had written a prize-winning essay on the `Use and abuse of satire’, Tenterden had presided over some of the most notorious political trials of the age, including those of William Hone, T. J. Wooler, Richard Carlile, Francis Burdett and the Cato Street conspirators.81 Throughout the proceedings Wakley and Scarlett adopted two distinct and opposed rhetorical strategies. In keeping with his political agenda, Wakley sought to focus attention on the broader implications of Cooper’s alleged incompetence. He began his opening address by elaborating a vision of medicine as a form of public service. Guy’s Hospital, he insisted, was an `institution of very great importance’, not only as a charity but also because of its medical school, whose students would eventually practise throughout the length and breadth of the country. `Hence it is of utmost importance to the public welfare that the practice inculcated should be safe, and scientific, and . . . calculated to promote the interests of the public’.82 The rest of his case endeavoured to establish that, because of the nepotistic system by which Cooper had come to occupy his post, this was not the case and that The Lancet had acted in the public interest by exposing his inabilities. Most of Wakley’s witnesses had been present at the operation and were there to confirm the details of the procedure, with most affirming that they `never saw an operation performed so unscientifically and in such a bungling manner’.83 Yet even with such specific questioning, Wakely endeavoured, as far as was possible, to keep the wider political issue in view, often to Lord Tenterden’s consternation. For example, during the questioning of Alderman Partridge, a surgeon from Colchester, the following exchange took place: Mr Wakley. Do you believe, taking all the circumstances into consideration that Mr Cooper performed the operation in a scientific manner? No, I could not say I thought he did, certainly. Do you believe the operation was performed in a manner in which the public have a right to expect such an operation ought to be performed by a surgeon of Guy’s Hospital? Lord Tenterden. He does not know the meaning of that, ?what the public have a right to expect! Was it performed with proper skill? One hardly knows what the public have a right to expect. Mr Wakley. That is charged, my Lord. Lord Tenterden. Yes, I believe it is, ?I see it is. You have a right to put the question. Mr Wakley. Do you think the operation was performed in a manner the public have a right to expect from a surgeon of Guy’s Hospital? That operation? That operation? No, I do not.M. Lobban, `Abbott, Charles, first Baron Tenterden (1762 ?832)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Oxford, 2004).81Wakley, Report of the Trial, op. cit., 15 ?6. 33. 84ibid., 19 ?0.83ibid.,MayThe Lancet, libel and English medicineWakley’s most audacious move, and the one which most answered his political purpose, was his sum.
