BOTH SIDES, 
Six tract from the Transylvania Journal of Medicine and the Associate Scien- 
ces, Vol. I. No. 14, November 1828—page 532. 
EVSEEV ON THE BANDAGE. 
“It is rather a singular fact, that on a subsequent occasion, another individ- 
ual, who bad been under my charge, for an injury done the head of the fibula, 
some time after leaving me, became the patient of the professional character, 
who had failed in the treatment of the case just recited; and when this very 
simple case eventuated in the loss of the limb, the patient was taught to 
ascribe that loss to his treatment, while under my charge. 
The history of the case is as follows. In attempting to mount his horse, 
the patient was thrown with the inferior and outer part of one knee on a 
piece of timber. In a few minutes I was called, and upon examination, the 
head of the fibula gave to my hand the sensation of an egg-shell crushing be- 
tween the fingers; no other part of the limb received the slightest injury. 
The patient was in great pain, which was attributed in part to the injury 
sustained by the peroneal nerve. The bandage was applied, extending from 
the toes until it passed the knee, notwithstanding a variety of imprudences, 
committed by the patient, in rolling in bed, in eating and drinking secretly, 
articles of the most injurious kind, whereby two severe attacks of fever 
were produced, and in interrupting the dressings; yet about the twenty- 
second day from the injury, he was well enough to leave me and go to the 
country. 
He was not long in the country, before I was informed that he was again 
ill, and that his leg was swelled and painful near the ankle. The individual 
who could lend the weight of his word to propagate error and do injustice, 
in a case, the history of which affords sufficient evidence in favour of the 
treatment instituted, only exposes his own weakness and folly to the derision 
of the intelligent in the profession. 
Had the bandage been judiciously continued after leaving me, (I will here 
remark that the bandage was continued until the day my limb was amputated; 
probably not with that judicious power in which it teas first applied,) the pa- 
tient might have been the subject of fever for months in succession, from im- 
{>roper indulgence in eating and drinking, without necessarily losing his 
imb. Nothing can exceed the folly and the stupidity of the charge against 
the use of the bandage in that case; the more especially as the patient was 
well enough after two attacks of fever, induced by imprudence, and the in- jury done his knee and the head of the fibula, to leave town in twenty-tw® days. 
It must be manifest even with the tyro, that the evil effects of the bandage, 
when they do occur, are speedily made known. Swelling, inflammation, deep 
seated abscesses, suppuration and sloughing, are incompatable with its direct 
action on any part. Its tendency is immediately opposed to each of these 
states of the system. The law whereby constitutional diseases are inclined 
to spend their force on parts rendered prematurely weak and excitable by 
violence or otherwise, seems to have escaped attention. 
It is from that law, a solution of the case in question, is to be drawn; whil® 
from ignorance or neglect of it, the patient ultimately lost his limb. By 
means of the bandage, I have been enabled to save more limbs, the removal 
of which had been determined on by other physicians, than all the cases of 
amputation together would amount to, in which I had the least agency, eith- 
er immediately or otherwise, for the last fourteen years. 
To the Editor of the Transylvania Journal of Medicine and the Associate 
Sciences. 
Sir—On perusing one of the late numbers of your Journal, I perceived 
several statements of cases therein, intended to illustrate the utility of tight 
bandaging, under the signature of Dr. B. W. Dudley, the professor of Surge- 
ry in the Transylvania University. 
The case which particularly arrested my attention, is the one that he most 
fully dwells on, in the 532 page of the 14th number, for Nov. 1828, which 
is evidently intended as a representation of my own case. Presuming that 
your Journal was established to promote the science of medicine, to impart 
correct information to the student, and to enlighten the community at large, 
by publishing to the world facts, and correcting or exposing errors, 1 have 
therefore deemedit necessary to address you, in answer to Dr. Dudley’s state- 
ment of my ease "as alluded to above. Had he confined himself to the facta 
it actually presented, without descending to the gratuitous task of comment- 
ing upon my habits at the expense of truth, in violation of his duty as a pro- 
fessional man, and at the sacrifice of the ordinary courtesies of life, I should 
not, at this late day, have trespassed upon your attention, or claimed the pub- 
lic ear. But, as he has thought it to accord with his principles as a gentle- 
man, and reputation as a surgeon, to add insult to the injury he has already 
inflicted upon me, through his culpable ignorance of the nature of the injury 
I had received, and want of judgment in the treatment of my case, and seems 
disposed to exculpate himself from censure, by the heralding forth his good 
fame, at the expense of my reputation, as well as that of others, justice re- 
quires that I should arrest the current of erroneous impressions, which it is 
too evidently the wish of Dr. Dudley to impose upon the public. Were his state- 
ments destined to be seen alone by those to whom we are both known, or by 
those who could have an opportunity of informing themselves rightly as to 
facts, I should have treated his production with that contempt, which, from 
its malignity and falsehood, it so richly merits; but as such is not the case, I 
must be indulged while I rescue my character from the insidious stab of one, 
who avails himself of official station, to injure an individual whom he, by hia 
want of skill, has rendered a cripple for life. 
To begin then with Dr. Dudley, and his statement. lam really at a loss 
to conjecture to whom he alludes when he says, that “I was taught to ascribe the loss of my leg to his treatment, by a professional character, into whose 
hands I fell subsequently to being under his charge.” In his publish- 
ed history of my case, he states, that “in attempting to mount his horse, the 
patient was thrown on a piece of timber.'’ Now the fact is, that in attempting 
to mount the horse, my cloak caught, and I could not gain the stirrup, and in 
jumping off I sprained my leg, as will appear in the sequel. I fell on a grass 
plat; but as to the piece of timber the Doctor alludes to, if there, it must have 
been buried under ground, as it was neither visible to the sight, nor tangible 
to the touch. His notice is the first intimation I ever had of it. He then 
says, that “upon examination of the head of the fibula, it gave to his hand 
the sensation of an egg-shell crushing beneath his fingers; no other part of 
the limb received the slightest injury.” It certainly cannot have escaped the 
memory of Dr. Dudley, as well as that of several other persons, who were 
present when I met with the accident, that not more than ten minutes elapsed 
before he was present, and that after pulling off a tight boot, and examining 
the limb, he observed it wras only a sprain; but upon a more close examination, 
he said both bones were broken about three inches below the knee, and em- 
ployed two gentlemen in holding the broken bones, while he waspreparing 
the bandages, which he applied in the following manner: he first tore off five 
or six small bandages about two and a half inches in width, and about twro feet 
long; these he saturated with whiskey, and bound over the knee; he next 
applied the long roll-bandage, (which was also saturated in spirits,) begin- 
ning at the toes and extending upwards nearly to the hip-joint. Being thus 
bandaged up like a harlequin and placed upon abed, but a very short time had 
elapsed before I felt the most excruciating tortures, and observed to those 
present, I could never stand it; that the pain created by the blood endeavour- 
ing to force its passage to the extremities of the injured leg, was beyond en- 
durance. I felt the pain just above the knee joint, and in the tendons un- 
derneath the knee. 
3 
My friends taking it for granted that the Doctor ought to know best, not- 
withstanding the remonstrance of the Reverend George C, Light, who wish- 
ed to relieve me, suffered me to remain in the situation I have described, un- 
til I became delirious, under the baneful effects of the tight bandaging. 
While in this situation, I may have been guilty of the imprudence of rolling 
in bed, as reported by Dr. D.; but agreeable to the representation of my friends, 
Dr. D. was sent for three different times during the first night; the first time 
he sent a message to this purport—that I must endeavour to bear the bandages, 
ahd that they ought not to be removed (I think) for two weeks. To the 
second message he returned a note, stating that he would not have the ban- 
dages removed for one hundred dollars, and that the cause of my extreme 
pain arose from the circumstance of the fracture extending into the knee 
joint, and that he could compare it to nothing else than egg-shells beat in a 
mortar. The third time he was sent for, he came, and observed, he was as- 
tonished I had no more philosophy. Philosophy! Philosophy in a man par- 
tially deranged by tight bandaging, which prevented his blood from circular 
ting? Had Job, with all his patient forbearance, been driven to madness by 
the empericism of his physician, I question very much whether bis philoso- 
phy would have availed him much more than mine did me. In the morning 
of the second day, when he came to see me, Dr. D. loosened the bandage to 
the knee joint, and if I mistake not, it wras relieved again the same day by 
®r* Webb, by the consent of Dr. D. The bandaging from the knee to the 
extremity of the foot, was not removed for several days, and always reap- 
plied as soon as wet with spirits, as before. In this situation I was kept for 
twenty-six days, (Dr. D. says twenty-two.) Whether the variety of impru- 
dences as ascribed to me by Dr. D., sueh as rolling in bed, &c. arose during 4 
the first forty-eight hours, when labouring under delirium, brought on by his 
want of judgment, I know not; it is, however, a pitiful subterfuge for him to 
take shelter under such a flimsy covering, from the well deserved cen 
sure, consequent on his ignorant treatment of me. The next items in his list 
of my imprudences, are hischarges against me odealing and drinking secret- 
ly, articles of the most injurious kind. This is evidently an after thought, 
eminently worthy of one so skilled in surgery. Is it not too ridiculous”for 
serious refutation, that an invalid, who was unable to move from off his bed, 
could procure articles of food and drink secretlyf But if they were so se- 
cretly disposed of, how came the fact in the possession of Dr. Dudley? Did 
he discover a knowledge of it, by the same penetrating eyes that enabled 
him to discern the timber, on which his imagination so ingeniously broke my 
leg? He certainly should have explained the name, and quality of those in- 
jurious articles, in which I indulged, as also how and by whom he obtained 
his information. By whom was I furnished with them? wherefore the neces- 
sity for secresy? I was not in a situation to demand of me a resort to any 
such means, to gratify my appetite. I had arrived at the age of maturity, 
and was surrounded by those, whose hospitality, kindness” and attention 
were only equalled by their sympathy for my sufferings, and solicitude for 
rny relief—whose indulgence would have precluded the necessity of resort- 
ing to secresy, to procure either the necessaries or luxuries I might have 
needed or desired. Instead of its being necessary to practice covert devi- 
ces to procure articles of “a pernicious kind” to indulge in, it was not an un- 
frequent, though a painful duty I had to perform, in refusing the numerous 
little messes provided by the generous thoughtfulness of those, by whom it 
was my good fortune to be surrounded. I say the duty was a painful one—it 
was truly so tome, to be compelled by a sense of propriety, in obedience to the 
directions of my surgeon, to reject the proffered kindnesses of those whose 
greatest pleasure it was 
“To bind up the wounded heart, 
And pillow the aching head.” 
It is well known that I neither ate nor drank any thing out of the common 
prescriptions given by Dr. Dudley, for my guidance, without consulting him, 
except in one or two instances, which I shall notice, during the whole course 
of my confinement, while under his charge. I recollect a few days after the 
accident occurred, of asking for a glass of wine sang aree, which was hande'd 
me, though not secretly. I had scarcely tasted it before Dr. Dudley came in, 
and pointing to it, I asked him whether it was proper for me to drink it; and 
on his replying that it was not, I desisted from doing so. Again, about eight 
or ten days from this period, I drank about a tumbler of cider without his 
consent; but this was done openly and not secretly. About the third week 
after I met with my accident, and after Dr. Dudley had propounced that I 
would soon be well, (although my leg was then as scaly as the back of a fish 
and smelt, as I was told, very offensively,) I did, as he states, perhaps im- 
prudently, eat a few oysters. These are the only times that I recollect of 
having either ate or drank any thing out of the range of Dr. Dudley’s gene- 
ral prescriptions. It is perfectly within my remembrance, that after I had 
eaten those oysters of which I have just spoken, upon Dr. Dudley’s being 
informed of it, that he said they were the most injurious things I could have 
eaten, and that a person present observed to him, “Doctor, when I was so ill, 
you recommended them to me.” “Yes,” was his reply, “but those that I 
recommended to you, were cured in their own liquor.” He was then informed 
that those I had eaten were also cured in their own liquor, and not with 
vinegar. After this explanation, he admitted they were innocent. Notwith* 5 
standing this admission, in his desperation, like a drowning man catching at 
atraws, he has continued to harp upon this oyster business. I feel satisfied, 
after this candid detail offsets, that the intelligent part of the community will 
conclude, that the reason assigned by Dr. Dudley as the cause of his failure, 
is no less impotent than but serves to expose “his weakness and 
folly to the derision of the enlightened in the profession.” I recollect but 
once of having any considerable increase of fever, except what was in 
duced by the cause already assigned, while under Dr. Dudley’s care, 
when at my request he gave me a dose of medicine. This was some 
lime after the “egg shell fracture” took place. I am the more cer- 
tain of this circumstance, because of my having asked him if the medicine 
was not calomel, and observing to him that I was in the habit of taking from 
fifteen to eighteen grains. His reply is distinctly within my recollection; it 
was, “if ten grains would not have the desired effect, fifty would not.” 
I shall now notice the journey I performed, which, as the Doctor says, 
was about the 22d day, but which, in fact, was on the 26th day. He says, 
“nothing can exceed the folly and stupidity of the charge against the use of 
the bandage in my case, the more especially as the patient was well enough af- 
ter two attacks of fever induced by imprudence, and the injury done his knee, 
and the head of his fibula, to leave town in twenty-two days.” Here the 
Doctor is at points with himself. He certainly must have forgotten that in 
giving a history of the case, at the commencement, he says, no other part of 
the limb received the slightest injury except the head of the fibula, which 
was like the crash of egg-shells; but when he recites my journey, performed 
on the 22d day, in order to impress the public with the idea that the case was 
a very desperate one, (which, unfortunately for me, was made so by his 
mismanagement.) and that consequently the case was bordering on the miracu- 
lous, he recollected of a sudden that the knee was injured. 
Now in all human probability, if the Doctor had written another paragraph, 
he might have recollected the circumstance of his giving two gentlemen the 
trouble of holding tico bones, which he represented as being broken, whilst 
he was preparing and applying the bandages. It is unfortunate for the suc- 
cess of the Doctor, that he is not able to continue this delusion, as with the 
aid of those two bones, which were never broken, except in his imagination, 
he might be able to make out a tolerably specious case. Facts, however, 
stand too strongly arrayed against him, and he has been compelled to yield to 
circumstances. Owing to his wretched msappiehens ion of the nature and 
extent of the injury I had received, and barbarous application of the bandages, 
the flesh sloughed off, and exposed the bones to view, when it was discover- 
ed that there was not the slightest crack perceptible—no evidence of broken 
bones. 
This can be established by some of the most eminent physicians, as well 
as by several respectable gentlemen in and around Lexington. Thus driven 
to the wall, the Doctor has very prudently droptthe broken bones, conscious 
that so flagrant a mistake would be received as proof of his defective judgment, 
and as a reflection upon his skill as a surgeon. 
A more gross misconception of the character of an injury, I think I might 
venture to assert, is not to be found in the books; nor never did any individual 
Buffer more through stupidity than I have done; for, by what other name 
shall I designate that condition of the mind, which mistakes a simple sprain, 
for an injury of the complicated kind, as ascribed to mine by Dr. Dudley? I 
will return to my case. The day succeeding the one on which I met with 
the accident, Dr. Webb, as before premised, came to see me, and observed 
that if the bandage remained in its then situation much longer, I must either 
lose my limb or my life; and if I mistake not, it was at his suggestion the 
bandage was loosened the first time to the knee, by Dr. Dudley. About the second week, my friends, finding my situation growing worse, called ia 
another physician, Dr. Pindell, in consultation with Dr. Dudley, to whom 
Dr. D. represented the “broken hones'' and the “egg shell fracture,'' ob- 
serving to him, that he should not like to remove the bandages. Dr. Pindell 
did not insist upon their being removed, but replied that he should have pre- 
ferred putting my leg in a box, and advised the application of warm vinegar, 
which was poured over the bandages, with the approbation, as I presume, of 
Dr. Dudley. After this, Dr. P. made two different appointments to meet him 
in consultation, but Dr. D. both times failed to make his appearance, W'hich 
occasioned Dr. P. to desist visiting me, and I never saw him again until 
after my removal from Lexington. 
After a day or two, Dr. Dudley stopped the application of the vinegar, ob- 
serving it was of no use; that the application of the bandages was all that wag 
necessary; and that the reason why most of the physicians were so averse 
to using them, was because they did not know how to apply them. 
That they were like a set of old dray horses, (I think he said,) that could 
not begot out of the old beaten track. If lam not egregiously mistaken, ho 
also stated that the old fashioned mode of using splints in cases of fracture 
was entirely abandoned, being superseded by the application of the bandage, 
by the first surgeons in Europe. 
My limb, in a very short time after this, became very offensive, and Dr. Dud- 
ley will recollect, he was asked the cause. What he attributed it to, I was 
not informed until some time after my removal to the country, whither he 
was not invited, his services not being desirable. It must, I think, be ob- 
vious to all, that mortified pride has driven him to the unenviable task of ac- 
counting by means of slander and falsehood, forconsequences arising from his 
own mal-treatment of me, and hence springs bis charges of the secret use of 
articles of a pernicious tendency, which he has so uncharitably trumpeted 
foith to the public against me. 
It may be proper to remark in this place, that whilst under the direction of 
Drs. Pindell, Satterwhite and Webb, my course of diet was altered, and in- 
stead of restricting me, they gave me stomachics to increase my appetite. 
This they deemed necessary to counteract the ill effects which were likely to 
result to my general system from the copious discharges of my leg, it being 
their opinion that if my appetite failed, I could not survive many days. I 
would here ask, is it probable that a little icine tangaree, a tumbler of cider, 
and a few oysters, used during a period of twenty-six days, could have pro- 
duced such unhappy results'! If so, what could have produced that scrofula 
appearance and purple spots, before I either drank the cider, or tasted the 
oysters. Surely it rvas not barely taking a mouthful of wine sanguree to wet 
my lips, and moisten a parched throat. No, the cause is to be traced to the 
application of the bandage, and to that alone, notwithstanding “the law 
whereby constitutional diseases seems to have escaped attention, and the 
fourteen years experience” (of Dr. Dudley,) “in the application of tight 
bandages.” 
But to proceed; knowing I was trespassing upon the generous hospitality 
where I was then unavoidably confined, 1 was anxious, as well as rny more 
interested friends, to remove to the country, and Dr. Dudley must surely re- 
collect being questioned as to the propriety of the measure; if he does not, I 
perfectly remember his answer, which was, that I had better remain a few 
days longer, that I would soon he tcell enough. I waited patiently several 
days, in hopes well enough would arrive; but instead of getting better, I evi- 
dently grew worse. Dr. Webb at last insisted upon my removal, stating he 
could not, with propriety, interfere while I remained under Dr. Dudley’s 
charge; and without consulting him, I was removed the distance of two 
and a half miles from town. Dr. Dudley would fain have the public believe that when removed to the country, my leg was nearly well, than which n#» 
thing can be farther from the fact. I will describe the manner of my removal, 
from which it will be perceived that I was as low as I well could be. Dr. 
Webb removed me in a carriage, on the bottom of which a bed was placed, 
I was taken from the chamber in which I was confined, and carried to the 
carriage, and carefully laid on the bed provided for my reception. Thus sit- 
uated, I was conveyed by slow travelling to the residence of M. T. Scott, 
Esqr. lifted cut of the carriage, and carried to a bed previously prepared 
for me. 
So much for Dr. Dudley’s Flemish account of my being well enough about 
the twenty-second day, to leave him and go to the country. The day after 
my removal, after I had somewhat recovered from the fatigue of this icon- 
derful journey, Dr. Webb removed the bandages, when it was discovered 
that there were several purple spots, and one black one, about three or four 
inches below the knee, on the outer part of the leg, from which a copiou* 
stream of the most offensive matter immediately issued, nearly filling a quart 
vessel. As soon as it had stopped running, Dr. Webb went to Lexington 
for Dr. Pindell, who again attended me as a consulting physician. In a 
short period after this, every muscle in my leg began to decay, and finally 
rotted oft; my heel and part of the toes sloughed off. It was the opinion of 
the respectable physicians who attended me, as well as that of other intelli- 
gent persons who witnessed my sufferings, that the whole was ascribable to 
the improper application of the bandages, and that during the first forty- 
eight hours. 
In all probability, had the [sprain, for it was nothing more, been left to na- 
ture, she would have performed a cure in a few weeks; but it was my misfor- 
tune to call to ray aid a votary of light bandages, who, to gratify an unhallowed 
pride of opinion, has compelled me to wear a wooden leg “as a monument 
of bad surgery.” The fact is, that if Dr. Dudley was to put the same pressure 
upon an uninjured leg, that he did upon my sprained one, the same disastrous 
results would no doubt be produced. 
Again, Dr. Dudley attributes my sufferings and loss of limb to the interrup- 
tions of the bandages or dressings while under his care. This is the more 
strange, as he acknowledged to M. T. Scott, Esq. that during that time, the 
bandages were never removed but by himself, except once partially, and then 
by his directions. The Doctor is not, however, over scrupulous in framing 
excuses; for upon another occasion, in despite of the facts I have detailed, he 
asserted that if I had remained three days longer under his care, I would have 
got well. If there had been the slightest ground for .such an assertion, how 
is it possible that the inflammation, deep seated abscesses, suppuration, and 
sloughing, that immediately followed my translation from Lexington, could 
have taken place. It will not be contended that this instantaneous change 
is attributable to the effects of the country air; if not, what was the cause? 
Nothing more nor less than Dr. Dudley’s tight bandages. The excuse 
which 1 have just exposed, calls to my mind a conversation which he had 
with the same gentleman, in reference to the application of his bandages. 
He gravely contended that if he had the strength sufficient to exert a force 
equal to the power of ten horses in their application, it would be impossible 
to injure a limb, provided the bandages were wrapped regularly. 1 merely 
mention this to convince the public how carefully the Doctor is to outrage 
decency and common sense, rather than his favourite hobby should not be 
sustained. Every one who knows any thing about the matter, must know, 
that such a force applied to a limb, would grind it in good earnest to an egg- 
shell substance; it would be better for the Doctor to be candid for once, plead 
guilty, and abandon his leg-destroying bandages; for unless he does, should 
he have many cases, he will have much to'answer for; for each one will have 8 
•ausa to bear testimony agaimt him. The Doctor really seems to hare set 
out with the determination to run a tilt after dilemmas, as will appear from 
the following. He says, “He (1) was not long in the country before I (he) 
was informed that he was again ill, and that his (my) leg was swelled and 
painful near the ankle.” 
Now it so happened that my illness had not intermitted. But why should 
he particularise the pain as being “near the ankle?” The fact is, there 
were many other parts of the leg which caused me infinitely more suffering 
and pain. To me it seems somewhat singular, that the Doctor’s information 
should be so precise at this remote period as to enable him to locate the seat 
of pain; for on reference to a note written by him only II months after the 
accident occurred, he affects to have forgotten both me and my case. 
Notwithstanding all Dr. Dudley has said to the contrary, it is an undenia- 
ble fact, which can be substantiated by several distinguished gentlemen of 
the faculty, that my leg was in a slate of mortification when my friends re- 
moved me from under his care, extending from 4 or 5 inches above the knee 
to the end of my toes. To'the skill of the physicians who attendee! me, after my 
removal, together with the unceasing attentions of my friends, am I indebted 
for my recovery. To Dr. Webb, who scarcely ever left my bed side during 
a period of five months; to Drs. Pindell and Satterwhite, (the two latter at- 
tended in consultation,) I owe a debt of gratitude, I fear I never shall repay. 
In about five months after my accident, my situation being considered ex- 
tremely precarious. Dr. Scott of Chillicothe, (now of Lexington) was written 
for; but having unfortunately met with an accident the day before his intend- 
ed departure with a view of visiting me, he was prevented from coming, and 
I of availing myself of his services at the time. 
In the month of June following, Dr. Webb, being anxious of returning to 
Ohio, by the advice of Dr. Scott, and the approbation of Dr. Pindell, who 
were consulted upon the occasion, I was removed to Chillicothe, a distance 
of 150 miles. It was considered by my physicians, that in my low and 
doubtful condition, a change of air might be serviceable to me. At the period 
of which I am now speaking, five months after the accident, nortvithstand- 
ing the Doctor, in his report, alleges I was “well enovgh” to leave him and 
go to the country about the 2'2d day, I was so reduced that my back and hip 
bones had come through the skin, and I was wholly unable to help myself. 
I was so low that it was found necessary to fix the bed on which I was laid, 
on a springy board in the carriage; I was lifted in and out as occasion requir- 
ed. Mrs. N. and a servant, besides the driver, accompanied me /£,lhe- car- 
riage, toVmder such assistance as might be requisite, and Dr. Webb and his 
brother accompanied on horseback. On my arrival at Chillicothe, Dr. Scott 
examined my leg, and then pronounced it as his opinion, that it would never 
be of much service to me; but that after it should have been healed, I would 
be the better able to judge, and if it should be necessary then to have it 
taken off, I would be in a better situation to undergo the operation. In about 
four weeks from my arrival in Chillicothe, I had so far recovered as to be 
able to set up, and occasionally to walk with the aid of crutches, and a stirrup 
suspended from tny neck, so as to support my skeleton of a leg. In the 
month of August following, by the advice of Dr. Scott, I returned to Ken- 
tucky to avoid the autumnal fever which had prevailed for one or two year* 
in Chillicothe. 
In the month of November, I had so far regained my strength, as to be able 
to leave Kentucky for Baltimore, my leg being supported on a pillow in the 
carnage. 
Thus after eleven months of the most intense suffering, I was enabled one# 
more to reach my home, with a mutilated limb, produced from the want of 
•kill and judgment in my medical attendant at the commencement of the 
•aso. 9 
On my arrival in Baltimore, Dr. Buckler, who is my femiiy physician, eaM 
ed to see me, and on examining my leg, said it did not appear that any bones 
had been broken, but that it would never be of any use to me, and advis- 
ed amputation; at this period my leg was nothing but skin and bone, there be- 
ing nothing left but the artery to nourish it, the little flesh and muscles it used 
to have, having rotted off. 
At Dr. Buckler’s request, Drs. Davidge and Jamison, were called in on con- 
sultation. On examination, the latter gentleman coincided in opinion with Dr. 
B. and recommended amputation; the former agreed as to the first point, but 
recommended amputation to be deferred for a time to see the effect the 
efforts of nature might produce. Desirous, if possible, of saving my limb, I 
awaited the operations of nature until the 24th of April following, when des- 
pairing of recovery, on that day the amputation was performed by Dr. Buck- 
ler and Dr, Gibson, and in the presence of Dr. Lyon, now demonstrator of 
anatomy in the medical college of this city, Dr. Keerl who is now in Eu- 
rope pursuing his studies, and Drs. Coskery, Caldwell, Pearce and Handy; 
those gentlemen, who dissected and examined the limb after it had been taken 
off, told me there was no sign of fracture that they could discover. Thus ends 
the history of the case of the “broken bones,” the “egg shell crash, and the in- 
jured knee,’ ’ after seventeen months of the most excruciating torture. It is un- 
reasonable to presume for a [moment, that effects so extraordinary could have 
proceeded from a simple sprain, unless superinduced by improper treatment. 
To Dr. Dudley’s want of judgment and tight bandages, I am indebted for all 
my suffering and the loss of my limb. 
In about six weeks after the operation was performed, I walked to my 
office, distance probably a quarter of a mile—so much for a skilful surgeon. 
In the month of November following, I mounted a wooden leg, and have vis- 
ited Kentucky three times since then; during the last summer and fall, I spent 
the most of my time in and around Lexington, and never heard a word of my 
case, until the day previous to my leaving Lexington, when I was informed il 
was preparing tor the press. A few days after my return here from Ken- 
tucky, I received a copy of his publication through the medium of the post 
office. To me it is inexplicable what fatuity could have beset Dr. Dudley, 
after an elapse of four years, to publish my case; much less can I account for 
the worse than savage pleasure he seems to indulge in, while unprovokedly 
assailing me. Had Dr. Dudley stopped after giving his imaginary statement 
of my as that was, I should have permitted him to have en- 
joyed undisturbed; but as he has calumniated me, and called my 
morals in question, I have felt myself bound to expose the grossness of his 
, professional errors, and to throw back the foul aspersions upon my reputa- 
tion, as unworthy of me, and becoming only him, in whose malevolent heart 
it was nurtured. In a word, I defy him and the miserable beings whom be 
has employed, or those who gratuitously lent their aid, to propagate the charge 
of eating and drinking to excess against me, to substantiate it, by the evidence 
of a solitary individual entitled to credit in the estimation of honourable men. 
In conclusion, I will appeal to the public, and ask them, admitting for argu- 
ment sake, that Dr. Dudley’s representation of my case was correct, which I 
deny—I say I ask them, I ask the intelligent of the medical profession, 
whether under the circumstances of the case he has made out, he was justifi- 
ed in the application of tight wet bandages? I ask them did they ever see, 
hear, or read of such treatment, except by Dr. Benjamin W. Dudley, in a 
case of egg-shell fracture, in Europe, Asia, Africa or America? And 
whether it succeeded? I have done with the Doctor. 
J am the public’s ob’tserv't, 
W, P. NICHOLSON, 10 
CERTIFICATES. 
The following is in answer to a letter I addressed to Dr. Buckler som. 
time after my limb had been amputated. 
COPY. 
Dear Sir—ln answer to your note of the 24th, in which you desire to 
know “if I could discover any appearance of fracture in the bones of your am- 
putated limb, more particularly of the head of the fibula and knee cap,” I 
•tate, for your satisfaction, that no trace of such injury was discoverable in 
either of these bones, nor could I perceive any sign by which I could infer 
that the larger bone of the leg or tibia had been fractured. 
Respectfully, &c. 
J. BUCKLER. 
May, 20th, 1826. 
My object in procuring the annexed certificates is merely to show that Dr. 
Dudley was entirely mistaken in the nature or extent of the injury I received. 
We, the undersigned, were present at the amputation of Mr, Nicholson’s 
limb, and have again examined it this dav. and do not nerceive anv signs of 
fracture. 
Signed, 
S. H. LYON, M. D. 
S. H. CALDWELL, M. D. 
W, D. COSKERY, M. D. 
Witness, W. A. Schaeffer. 
Baltimore, Jan, 9th, 1829. 
We have examined the bones of a leg, handed to us by Mr. Nicholson, and 
do not perceive any evidence of fracture in either of them; asfljfc the head 
of the fibula appears perfect. 
Signed, GEORGE S. GIBSON, M. D. 
MAXWELL McDOWELL, M. D. 
MICHAEL DIFFENDERFFER, M. D. 
JOSHUA I. COHEN, M. D. 
GEORGE FRICK, M, D. 
WM. DONALDSON, M. D. 
We have examined the bones of a leg, which was handed us by Mr. Ni- 
cholson, and particularly the head of the fibula, and do not perceive any evi- 
dence of fracture. 
Signed, JOHN J. McKENZIE, M. D. 
S. BIRCKHEAD, M. D. 
ALEXANDER CLENDINEN, M. D. 
ASHTON ALEXANDER, M. D. 
SAMUEL BAKER, M. D. 
W. FISCHER, M. D. 11 
I do hereby certify, that I buried Mr. Nicholson’s limb, and at his request 
took it up again the other day, cleaned it, and gare it to him, and that the limb 
now before me is the same one. 
Witness my hand, this 9th of Jan. 1829. 
JOHN C. BROWN, Sexton of Christ Church. 
State of Maryland, City of Baltimore, se. 
On the 9th of January, 1829, before me, the subscriber, a justice of the 
peace for the said city, personally appeared John C, Brown, Sexton of Christ 
Church, in said city, and made oath on the Holy Evangely of Almighty God, 
that the several facts contained and set forth in the above certificate, are res- 
pectively true as they therein stand stated. 
Sworn and subscribed before me the day and year first written. 
W. A. SCHAEFFER. 
I certify that I was present when John C. Brown buried Mr. Nicholson’s 
limb, and also when he took it up again, and that the limb now exhibited is 
the same one. 
Witness, W. A. Schaeffer. W. T. PEACHEY. 
Baltimore, 9th January, 1829. 
"I was called, and upon examination, the head of the fibula gave to my 
hand the sensation of an egg-shell crushing between the fingers. No other 
part of the limb received the slightest injury.” 
Dr. Dudley's Statement.