- '' ''

mr..^M- Ul

'•''A ^A '»

t

Correspondence between Mr.G.S.Pattison •^^i^; 't"'^""i" , ,

and Dr. II. Chapman
1821.

i o* . ?,*•*•'-

^n
"W-'.":-. '
. .-^^^ w>.
w.
'
- * » *''. "t-;^
¦•; ';•;'•
'',44. -e
CORRESPONDENCE • BETWEEN
MR. GRANVILLE SHARPE PATTISON,
AND
'*' 1 DR. N. CHAPMAN.
SECOND EDITION, WITH EXPLANATORY REMARKS.

V I O A

-pW ,^

PREFACE.

No honourable man can expect that I should degrade my
self by noticing, with a view to a formal refutation, the ca
lumnies, resting on his authority only, which have been
raised against my character by so infamous an individual as
Granville Sharpe Pattison! But to gratify the curiosity
which has eagerly sought my first publication, as well as to
furnish a clear and just exposition of the origin of the con
troversy with him, I have had a second edition, the for
mer being very limited, of the pamphlet printed, with a few
explanatory remarks.
This concise statement of facts is now submitted to the
Public, with the whole of the proceedings, duly authenti
cated, of the Court of Judicature of Edinburgh, which con
victed Mrs. Catharine Ure of an adulterous intercourse with
the said Granville Sharpe Pattison !
N. CHAPMAN.

Philadelphia, August, 1821.

To have added certificates to the ensuing statement,
would have rendered the publication inconveniently long.
But with a view of guarding against inaccuracies, I sub
mitted the manuscript to each of the gentlemen whose names
are introduced, and am authorised to say, that the aver
ments in every instance, are correct and true.

CORRESPONDENCE, i^c.

IT seems to me proper, on several accounts, that the
ensuing Correspondence should be laid before the public ;
and, in order to render the subject to which it relates, more
intelligible, I shall add a few -remarks. Baltimore, 12th Oct, 1820.
Sir,
When the slightest insinuation is thrown out against the
character of a man of honour, it becomes his painful duty,
to seek that redress, which as a gentleman he is intitled to
demand, and no one, if he has injured another, can refuse.
Since my arrival in this country, much has been done by
certain individuals, to hurt my reputation ; and I have fre
quently heard, but in a manner which prevented me seeking
an explanation, that you had used great liberties in speaking
of my character. As I am determined that no person shall,
with impunity, couple my name with either a mean or dis
honourable action ; my present object in addressing you, is
to ascertain whether you have asserted, that you believe me
to be the author of an anonymous letter said to have been
received by you last winter, and at present handing about in
Philadelphia.

That I may immediately know how to proceed in this af
fair, I have to request that you will answer this letter, (which,
to prevent any mistake, shall be delivered into your hands
by Dr. Eberle,) by return of post.
I have the honour to be.
Sir, your obedient servant,
GRANVILLE SHARPE PATTISON.
For Dr. Chapman, &c. &c. &c.

Baltimore, 17th Oct. 1820.
Sir,
Mr. Pattison called on me last week for the purpose of
getting me to accompany him to Philadelphia as his friend,
to require of you an explanation of a report injurious to his
character, which he had reason to believe had emanated
from you. The exalted character, which I have ever enter
tained of you for honour and justice, induced me to advise
him to write you the letter delivered into your own hands by
Doctor Eberle on Friday evening — to which he has not yet
received any answer. Unwilling that this aflfair should be
brought to a disagreeable conclusion, I have again prevailed
on Mr. Pattison to delay his departure to Philadelphia, un
til a reply to this is due, when I hope to receive from you
such an answer as will enable me to make an arrangement,
at once honourable and satisfactory to the parties concerned.
I have the honour to be.
Sir, your obedient servant,
C. MACAULAY.
Doctor N. Chapman.
P. S. That this should come safe into your own hands, I
have enclosed it to Doctor Eberle, with the request that h&
should deliver it without delay. C. M.

Sir,
In answer to your letter of the 17th inst. I have only te
observe, that from various facts which have come to my
knowledge, of the character and conduct of Mr. Pattison,
as well in relation to the causes which compelled him to
leave Scotland, as to events which have subsequently hap
pened, I have determined to hold no communication with
him, by correspondence or otherwise.
If any further proceedings on the part of Mr. P. should
render it necessary, I shall take an opportunity, through the
medium of the press, of assigning the reasons which have
led me to this decision. I am. Sir very respectfully
Your obedient servant.
To Dr. C. Macaulay, &c. N. CHAPMAN.
Philadelphia, Oct. 19, 1820.
In the course of the last winter, a series of anonymous
letters were addressed to Dr. Physick and myself, of a very
offensive nature. Circumstances led us to suspect, that if
not written by Mr. Pattison, he was at least privy to their
production. They were marked by Scotticisms, had several
phrases peculiar to the medical schools of Scotland, and aimed
at the object, which we well understood, was steadily pur
sued by himself and friends, of forcing Dr. Gibson and Dr.
Horner out of their positions in our University, to make
way for his own admission. That these letters, however,
were circulated, or indeed shown to any person, except
to Dr. Dewees and Dr. Horner, I do deny.* The latter
gentleman tells me, of which I was not aware, that he did
speak of them unreservedly, as the probable production of
Mr. Pattison, which imputation he caused to be communi
cated to him, through the medium of his friends^ with a mes-
• One letter lately to Dr. R. M. Patterson.

sage, that he was prepared to render him any redress
which he might exact.*
In directing his interrogatory to this point alone, Mr.
* These repeated invitations are disregarded. It comported
much better with the views of Mr. Pattison, to provoke me to a
controversy with him, from which, in no event, could I hope to
escape without some degradation to myself, and injury to the
school of which I am a member.
That there was not the slightest pretext to call on me, on the
grounds alleged, is conclusively shown, by his failing to esta
blish the grievance of which he complained. No evidence what
ever does he adduce of my having circulated the anonymous
letters, or of even speaking of them publicly.
Being really actuated by the motives which he avows, why did
he not meet Dr. Horner ? Delicately alive to every imputatioa
on his honour, what is the reason he overlooked Dr. Gibson,
who, he tells us, went to Baltimore for the express purpose of
traducing his reputation, and in execution of this design, propa
gated reports concerning bim, " the most foul, the most malig
nant, and the most false," — going so far as even to assert, that
« my character was so infamous in Philadelphia, that every re
spectable family had closed their doors against me ?"*
These, surely, were provocations sufficient to arouse the spi
rit of a cavalier of such exquisite sensibilities. Two considera
tions led him to select me as the object of attack. Estimating
his character as I did, he was persuaded, that under scarcely
any circumstances could I meet him— and he hoped that there
might grow out of the negotiations incident to the occasion, an
arrangement, which would suppress the disclosure I had
threatened, of the affair of Mrs, Ure, an event which he uni
formly deprecated, as inevitably leading to his ruin. To secure,
however, himself against every possible danger, he postpones the
affair till the meeting of the classes, when he was aware that
my hands must be tied by all the obligations of duty, decorum,
and propriety. ' Vide Mr. Pattiaon's Pamphlet, p. 17.

Pattison obviously hoped to evade a subject, on which he
knew I had spoken often, and without disguise. To repel a
charge preferred against Dr. Physick and myself, and which
we learnt was most industriously propagated in Baltimore,
especially, of having brought him to this country, and after
wards very wantonly persecuting him — I had on several oc
casions, distinctly declared, such allegations to be utterly
false, — that, on the contrary, he was driven hither by an
incensed public, in consequence of a most odious deed,
hereafter to be explained, — and, that our reception and treat
ment of him were kind in the extreme, till he forfeited every
claim to our notice, by the development of his character, and
the particular reprehensibility of his conduct towards us.
The history of his visit to the United States may be told in
a few words. Early in November 1818, Mr. John Pattison,
the brother, announces to him the vacancy in our school, by
the death of Dr. Dorsey, with his advice to become a
candidate for the chair. The intelligence is received late in
December — he determines to do so, and letters of recommen
dation of this date, are procured and transmitted to Dr.
Physick and myself, which were received on the 12th of
April — and here commenced our knowledge of Mr. Gran
ville Pattison.
He did not contemplate, at first, coming to this country.
In March,* however, Dr. Ure, of Glasgow, sues out and
obtains a divorce from his wife, on the ground of an adulter
ous intercourse with Mr. Pattison. As must happen in every
community which retains any sense of virtue, or the posi
tive obligations of religion, a clamour is raised against him,
which, finding he could not resist, he repairs to London,
* This is incorrect. The divorce was obtained on the Sth of
February. 'Vide Documents. B

10
lingers there a few weeks, and then embarks for this coun
try.* '
What is the degree of Mr. Pattison's guilt in this trans
action, I shall not take on myself to determine. This is now
a matter between himself and his God. Documents, how
ever, which I have seen, prove that he was at the time, the
colleague of Dr. Ure, in the Andersonian Institution — that
he habitually visited in his family, one of the most respecta
ble in Glasgow, and that. the transgression did not proceed
from the temporary ascendancy of passion over moral re
straint, but was lengthened out and aggravated by repeated
assignations,t &c. &c.
* This is now put beyond the possibility of doubt. I have
lately been assured by Dr. Dewees, that he has seen a letter to
Mr. John Pattison, from a -very near relative, about the date of the
receipt here of the recommendations of his brother, stating — that
in consequence of the clamour excited ipiGlisgoyv against him,
on account of his amour with Mrs. Ure, he had deternlii^i.ed to quit
that city, and seek a settlement in London. He does so accord
ingly : but not meeting with encouragement, he sets sail for this
country, in the spirit of an adventurer, to try anew his fortune—
and such is the true history of his emigration !
t The whole matter is now disclosed. It appears from the
evidence on the trial in which Mrs. Ure was convicted of adul
tery with Granville Sharpe Pattison, that he deliberately seduced
the wife qfhis coTifidiftg friend, the intimate associate of his family,
and esfiec'ially of an unmarried sister, the mother .of numerous chil
dren, and whom, after having thus ruined, he leaves in absolute
beggary, in an obscure, town, 'ftregnant by him,— and finally, to
firomote his sinister views, he causes to make a false statement un
der the pretext offlrocuring for her alimony, and the firivilege of
seiing her children !!! Thus it is abundantly shown, that his con
duct, as I had before stated, was not the result of momentary
impulse, — not the single triumph of passion over regulated prin
ciple, — that it was not an act into which he was surprised by the

11
As stated, such I sincerely believe to be the cause of Mr.
Pattison's emigration. But this is denied, and he complains
of being allured hither by the promises of Dr. Physick and
myself. Where is the evidence of the fact ? It is said to be con
tained in a letter from Dr. Dewees, which I have never been
able to see. But I learn from the author of it, that to the
best of his recollection, it merely acquaints Mr. Pattison,
that it is the opinion of two gendemen, not designated by
name, who are well qualified to judge, that whatever may
be the weight of his credentials, he can not possibly succeed
in his application, without being personally present, and
therefore, advises his coming.
It is not pretended that the letter was written with my
privity or consent. The fact is, I knew nothing even of its
existence till seven or eight months subsequent to its date.
Even aUowing the reverse, it is still susceptible of proof,
that it could not and did' not supply the motive of Mr. Pat
tison's removal. The date of the letter cannot be exactly
ascertained. But I am assured by Dr. Dewees, that it must
have been written very late in April, and therefore, in all
probability, it was forwarded by the New-York packet of
the lOth of May, the stated period for the sailing of these
vessels, and I have one from Mr. Stirling, of London, of
the 27th of the same month, in which the immediate em
barkation of Mr. Pattison for the United States is men
tioned.
infirmities of his nature, or a temporary oblivion of moral and
religious education, and of which, in a season of reflection, he
became contrite and repentant — but, on the contrary, it proceed
ed from an utter insensibility to all- those sacred obligations,
from mere distempered pruriency, settled and confirmed in ha
bits of incorrigible' depravity.

12
By the preceding statement, a train of reflections is sug
gested. Why, it will be asked, did not Mr. John Pattison
call on Dr. Physic|c and myself, to ascertain how far such a
communication was authorized ? — what was the nature and
degree of support we were prepared to afford, as well as
the prospect of success in the proposed application for the
professorship ? Can it be presumed for a moment, that any
man situated as Mr. Granville Pattison is described to
have been at the time, triumphant as a teacher, prosperous as
a practitioner, devoted to his country, surrounded by family
and friends, would break such ties, and surrender up such
certainties for an attainment so indefinite and precarious I
Had, however, Dr. Physick and myself been inclined
to promote Mr. Pattison's election, we could not have
done it. Two of the Trustees of our College,' about the
first of May, waited on Dr. Physick, who was still confined
to his room by illness, to inform him, that they hati resolved
to make an.appointment, and that it was the opinion of a
large majority of the Board, that the interest of the school
imperatively required, he should be transferred to the Ana
tomical chair, in consequence of which strong representa
tion, he acquiesced, though very reluctantly, in the mea
sure. All the testimonials, however, in favour of Mr. Pattison,
in our possession, had , been laid before the trustees  ^he
was caused regularly to be nominated, — and in every respect
entire justice was done to his pretensions.*

. * The letter of Dr. Dewees I have now seen, and find it to be
precisely of the purport above stated. Wh^t relates to the sub
ject, is in the following words. " As far then, as a firm belief
that you would succeed (and that belief founded on pretty cer
tain data) will offer an inducement to pay us a visit, I have no
hesitation to declare, that no question remains in my mind, that

13
Before his arrival, the election was over, of which he is
apprised by Professor Hare, on his landing at New-York—
to whom, instead of expressing disappointment, or uttering
a complaint, he remarks, that the main motive of his visit
were you on the sfiot, your election would be certain. It is
unquestionably the opinion of two of the most influential and
best informed men here. Your visit should be as prompt as
possible, that you might have the necessary time for the prepa
ratory arrangements here. My opportunities to judge of the
sentiments of those, who have this gift in their power, will be
best explained by your brother."
In commenting on this document, I must in the first place,
again disclaim for myself, as well as for Dr. Physick, by whom I
am instructed to do so, all knowledge of its having been written,
much less that it was authorised by us. It is within our recollec
tion, that about the date of it, we did entertain and express the opi
nion to Dr. Dewees, without however knowing that he would act
on it in this way, that if Mr. Pattison were present, and realized the
extraordinary representations of his friends, he might succeed.
To this conviction we were led by the circumstance that the Trus
tees, after postponing the appointment for six months, from a
disinclination to choose any one of the candidates then in nomi
nation, had publicly advertised that they would receive applica
tions from any quarter. But we soon discovered our mistake, —
for at their first meeting, which took place not many days after
wards, when all the testimonials of Mr. Pattison were submitted
to them, so far from a favourable impression being made, these
recommendations were treated contemptuously, as extravagant
and hyperbolical,— it being quite manifest, that no individual with
half the merit which they set forth, would sacrifice his actual pos
sessions, to embark in so adventurous a scheme! Of this, Mr. John
Patuson was told by myself, and with a view of soothing his feel
ings, which seemed to be deeply wounded, I well remember
adding, that he ought not to be mortified at the rejection of his
brother's claims, since, on a former occasion, owing to local influ
ence and partialities, Dr. Augustine J. Smith, with the highest

14
to this country was to see his brother and family, and that he
should speedily return. Exactly the same language he holds
to Dr. Physick, Dr. Dewees, Dr. Horner and myself on his
reaching this city. Not a whisper of reproach escapes him,
possible reputation, supported too by the united voice of the
Medical Faculty, had been put aside.
Most solemnly do I declare, that in no one instance, did I
ever afford Mr. John Pattison the slightest encouragement. This
Dr. Dewees tells me, he uniformly acknowledged to him — often
expressed his concern at the circumstance — was suspicious that I
was not friendly to his brother, and conjured- him to. endeavour to
enlist me in his interests! ! !
No promise was obtained, or even directly asked of Dr. Phy
sick or myself, to support his brother. Why was Mr. John Pat
tison content with the representation only of Dp. Dewees ? Did
he not know that he had no connexion with the college, and that
the trustees, consisting of twenty-four individuals of the highest
rank and consideration, are no more to be dictated to, or con
trolled by any, or the whole of the rnedical professors, than the
Autocrat of all the Russias ? Was he not habitually with Mr.
Chauncey on this subject, who was either a trustee himself at
the time, or so intimately acquainted with many of that board,
as to afford him the most authentic information of their vie\ys and
dispositions. Expressly, indeed, does he declare, that through
out the affair he should be governed by the advice of that gen
tleman.* As to the state of the profession at the time; in this city, in
reladon to surgical skill, the profits of practice, or the emolu
ments of a professorship, it will be seen, that the information and
advice which I gave him in these sev.erai respects, corresponds
exactly with what he received from Mr. Chauncey, whose opi
nions he pronounces to be " all wisdpm," and in whom of course,
he reposed implicit confidence.!
The fact is, that on finding we could not carry Dr. Smith, the
* 'Vide Mr. Pattison's pamphlet.
t Vide p. 24, 25, 26 and 27 of Mr. G. S. Pattison's pamphlet, eontaining the
Letter of Mr. John Pattison.

15
even at the subsequent period, when he found Dr. Physick
and myself strenuously supporting Dr. Gibson in opposition
to him for the chair of Surgery. On the contrary, he says
to Dr. Physick, you have held out to me no promises, and
efforts of Dr. Physick arid myself were directed to the election -
of Dr. Warren of Boston. Of Mr. Pattison, we never thought
for a single moment — in proof of which, I appeal to our faculty,
whether, at any of our meetings, and to the trustees, with some of
whom we had daily interviews and conferences, the name of that
person was ever mentioned in relation td the subject.
His coming hither was, indeed, a matter of such extreme un
certainty, that whatever value we might have attached to his ta
lents as represented to us, we could not at all calculate on him :
and without his being present, we knew there was not the slight
est chance of his success. This he unguardedly confesses I
told him at one of our earliest meetings.*
Can it be credited, that Dr. Physick, Dr. Dewees, and my
self, are so profligate, for such is the amount-of the charge, as
to have conspired to import Mt. Granville Sharpe Pattison,
merely for the purpose of breaking up his establishment at home,
and then, after detaining him here, for a time, by a series of de
lusive kindness, to have commenced a system of the most ma
lignant persecution to effect his ruin !!!
We are accused of having tantalized him with expectations
by which he was prevented from returning home. It is
equally false. He was told, on all and every occasion, that the
door was closed against him in the University till a vacancy
should occur. The only proposition which we ever made to
him was to unite with Dr. Horner, as a teacher of practical ana-
tomy, to which the latter gentleman would not accede, from
having detected Mr. Pattison in a pitiful attempt to supplant
him as JDissector. Never, for a single moment, was the thought
entertained of a junction with Dr. Gibson in the surgical chair—
and here occurs one of those contradictions in the statements of
Mr. Pattison, which it is so difficult to avoid where there is an
• Vide Mr. Pattison's pamphlet, p. 9.

IB
therefore I have no claims on you. On this point I speak
positively, and with the express authority of Dr. Physick.
He further declares to us and many others, that he is
utter want of veracity. He allows his willingness to coalesce
with Dr. Gibson, and in alrnost the same page holds the fol
lowing language in reference to a proposal which, he says, was
made to him to become the associate of Dr. Horner :
" My answer was, that I never would come into that or any
other University, unless as an independent professor, with pow
ers and privileges equal to those possessed by my colleagues.
That one man was, if qualified by abilities and education, equal
to any professorship. If Dr. Horner's acquirements fitted him
for the delivery of a part of the lectures, he must be quaUfied for
giving the whole ; and that if he had riot talents which qualified
him to become the single professor, it was certainly neither for
my interest nor for the interest of the University, that such an
association should be formed. I therefore begged that the pro
posal might be considered as refused."*
I will only add, in dismissing this subject, that Mr. Pattison
was now on the spot, and had the most ample opportunities of
ascertaining with the utmost precision, what could be effected
for him, and on what he was to rely. He had seen that the whole
influence of Dr. Physick and myself, backed by the strongest
recommendations, could barely elect Dr. Gibson, who had also
the advantages of having an established reputation among us, of
being a native, and personally known to many of the trustees.
The point, indeed, had been absolutely setded. , Not long after
the election of Dr. Gibson, at the request of Mr. Pattison, Dr.
Physick and myself called on Mr. Binney and Mr. Meredith,
two of the trustees, to ascertain whether their board had, at a re
cent meeting, expressed a desire to make a provision for him;
to which they replied, certainly not, and never would, till he be
came a citizen of the United States, and afforded the evidence
of his pretensions, which is derived from personal knowledge.
Though this was communicated to.hini, and we supposed
" Vide pages 10 and 14, of his pamphlet. ,

17
very indifferent as to the event, meaning to go to London,
where he has the most brilliant prospects of professional suc
cess, and solicits Dr. Horner to accompany him on an ex
cursion to Canada, whence he is to sail for England.
The first intimation I had of his design to remain in this
country, was given in a conference with me, on the expe
diency of his accepting an offer of fifteen hundred dollars
from the college of Lexington, to teach Anatomy. The offer
is declined, not however, till the appointment is formally
made, and extracts from the whole of his letters of intro
duction, are published in the western papers.*
would be final, some evenings afterwards, in thb presence of se
veral individuals, at the house of Dr. Dewees, one of his most
intimate friends again renewed the subject, by inquiring of me,
whether a chair could not be created for Mr. Pattison, combining
physiology, with minute and morbid anatomy ? To this I distinctly
replied, and begged that it might so be told him, that I would
not make another effort — that I considered the opinion of
the trustees as decisive in regard to him — and that, moreover,
such a proposition seemed to clash with the claims of Dr. Hor
ner, which in every view I held to be paramount. The persons
present, among whom is Dr. Dewees, have a clear recollection
of this circumstance — and the more so, they inform me, from
Mr. Pattison's friend bursting into tears, on finding an extinc
tion to all his hopes— lamenting his pecuniary distresses, &c,
* With the cold indifference to truth for which he is sp con
spicuous, Mr. Pattison here makes a statement entirely false.
« The trustees," says he, " of the UniversUy of Lexington did
me the honour to elect me, without my knowledge, sometime in
the laker end of September." P. 44. Directly in contradiction
to this, President Holley, in a circular letter of October the 8lh,
publishes, « That our medical school will open on the second
Monday in November next. Dr. Caldwell has informed us,
that Dr. Pattison, Dr. Brown, and himself, will certainly be here
by the first day of the month."
Now the fact is, that the application was duly made t^

18
Now commences the distinguished kindness, or as he is
pleased to ttr-n it, the persecution of Dr. Physick and myself.
The masquerade dress which hitherto had enveloped him, he
throws off — approaches us in proper person, avows his pe
cuniary distresses, — unfolds his views,— -and solicits our
patronage. As the result of our best judgment, we discourage him
from settling in Philadelphia — urge his return to London— ^
or if determined to continiie in America, to select Baltimore
as a residence, having an opening both in the Medical School,
and in the practice of Surgery, crtated by the removal of
Dr. Giiison, and letters of introduction are solicited by me^
from this gentleman, for the purpose.* But he decides other-
wist — establishes himself in this city — and henceforward
is introduced into business by Dr. Physick — consulted in
some difficult cases — is "invited by him to operate before
an assemblage of medical men to display his skill — has a
letter backed by our joint recommendation to the Trustees,
to allow him accommodation for his Museum — we endea
vour to get him the privilege of lecturing in some apartment
of the University, — and attend his introductory lecture,
to manifest unequivocally to the students our friendly dis
position for the success of his course.
Yet, all this did not satisfy him, and in proportion as we
conceded, was the increase of his demands. To be appoint
or. Caldwell, who was furnished with all his documents, with
a distinct understanding,,that in the event of his election, he,
Mr Pattison, would accept. ^The college were, moreover, as 1 am
toUl, justly indignant at the disrespectful manner in which they
were treated, considering the only motive of Mr Pattison in
procurinj^ the appointment, was to have it published as an early
recognition of his consequence in this country.
* This, which has never been denied, looks very much like
the jealousy with which we have been insolently charged.

19
ed the adjunct of Dr. Physick, or to have phvsiology de
tached from me, and united with morbid and minute anato
my, as a separate professorship, was the sine qua non, the
last of his very reasonable demands.
It was in vain, we urged the inadmissibility of such ar
rangements — that they were improper in themselves — that
the Trustees would never appoint so recent a foreigner to any
place — that he must become a citizen — ratify his claims by
longer residence and more intimate acquaintance — keep
quiet — entangle himself with no medical , party — engage
in no dispute, and we would guarantee his ultimate suc
cess. After this, we had little intercourse with him. He seem
ed to be soured, gradually alienated himself from us, began
a system of hostility to the school and personal detraction
of the professors, and was as insolent in his general de
meanor, as he had previously been humble, laudatory, and
submissive. At this period, the letter of Dr. Dewees and the attend
ant accusations came forth, not manfully presented as a just
grievance, calling for explanation and redress, but in vague
and untangible rumours. Neither the one nor the other was
previously signified to Dr. Physick or myself, or even the
slightest dissatisfaction expressed.*
* The first intimation I had pf the existence of the letter was
in January, many months after the arrival of Mr. Pattison. It
was given to me by a friend in the presence of a large company,
of whom Dr, Dewees was one. I immediately asked him, in
the hearing of all, whether such a letter hatl been written by my
instructions, or with my knowledge, to which he answered in the
negative. This was told the very next morning lo the Patti-
sons. Not long afterwards we fully ascertained that these men,
while living in habits of the closest intimacy with .Dr. Dewees,
partaking of his hospitaUdes, and with every pra(ession of
friendship and good will towards hira, had diligently circu-

20
He had spoken of us at all times as his kindest benefactors,
and so late as the evening on which he delivered his in
troductory lecture, the 1st of November, he took me by the
hand, in the presence of Dr. Dewees, and several other gen
tlemen, and thanked me, and through me Dr. Physick, for
our liberal and magnanimous conduct towards him.
In a short time his character was pretty well evolved,
and we could not forbear to inquire into the validity of the
grounds on which our early prepossessions rested. It ap
peared, in the first place, that the account which he had
given us of the affair with Mrs. Ure, was so much distort
ed, as hardly to retain any of the facts. As this, however,
is a matter of leading importance, I shall be more precise.
Mr. Pattison, on hearing that the story of his amour had
reached Philadelphia, convened Dr. Physick, Dr. Dewees,
and myself, for the purpose of reading tp us an elaborate
printed pamphlet, containing his defence, on the conclusion
of which, he requested, that if convinced of his innocence,
we would give him a certificate to that effect. Though pro
bably none of us doubted it — such was our confidence in the
veracity of his statements, supported by the respectability
of his recommendations — we declined doing it, and advised
his submitting the case to Mr. Binney, or some other emi
nent legal character, for an opinion, as calculated to produce
a much stronger effect on the public mind.
Not long aftcrwi^rds, he tells me, with much apparent sa
tisfaction, that Mr. Binney had decided in his favour, and
requested me to communicate it to Dr. Physick, which I
accordingly did. Being widely diffused, this report served
very much to repress the force of the accusation, and was
only contradicted a month or two ago, by a declaration
lated in secret, copies of his letter, to show that he was either
the tool of Dr. Physick and myself, or had officiously intermed
dled in the concerns of the University !

21
from Mr. Binney to me, that he had never been at all con
sulted in the case.* He had previously told Dr. Physick,
that Mr. Chauncey had delivered a similar opinion. Whe
ther it be true, I am unable to ascertain. Mr. Chauncey
haying recently been professionally consulted by Mr. Pat
tison, considerations of delicacy forbid any application to
him on the subject.
Nor is this the only deception which he practised. A let
ter declared by him to be from Dr. Ure to his wife, was
read to us, to demonstrate the iniquity of their character, of
a description so execrably obscene, that I dare not cite even
a single passage, or ^lude more distinctly to its contents.
This letter, I have since understood, was not exhibited on
the trial, makes no part of the record, and the presumption
is strong, and more particularly as it proves to be anony
mous, that it is a nfiere fabrication.!
* This is positively denied by Mr; Pattison. But both Mr.
Walsh and Mr. Peters recollect, that some time after my sepa
ration from him, being asked, what I thought of his guilt, I re
plied, that having heard from him that Mr. Binney had pro
nounced his innocence, I was bound to believe it. That Mr.
Chauncey, such is my confidence in the integrity, and profound
respect for the judgment of that eminent lawyer, should give an
opinion on a statement purely ex parte, seems to me so impro
bable, that I suspect here, too, Mr. Pattison is guilty of a false
hood. t As stated, the letter does not appear among the official do
cuments. Though from its detestably indelicate nature, I shoidd
wish to pass it over, I am not now permitted to do so, on account
of the great importance which has been given to it. The
letter, it will be perceived, I had pronounced to be a fabri
cation, and to this conclusion I was led from the character of
its contents, which was confirmed by the lame and improbable
explanation of the mode in which it was procured.
The letter apprises his wife of his knowledge of her amours at
Edinburgh, and approves of her continuing in this course of in-

22
What is the precise standing of Dr. Ure in Glasgow, or
how it was affected by this public event, I have no means
of accurately determining. But it is not true, as averred by
Mr. Pattison, that covered with disgrace, he was expelled
famy, provided she takes care not to add to his family. These
atrocious sentiments are clothed in language, and brought out in
such gross relief, as can only be imagined by one educated in
stews, and conversant with the slang of these scenes of unmiti
gated moral depravity and personal abasement. Now I challenge
the whole records of vice for a parallel case. Where is the hus
band to write such a letter? Where is the wife to receive it? To
the human heart, by which we are never deceived, I appeal on
the occasion, and ask whether it does not turn from the charge
with loathing and disgust, as a fabrication of unheard-of baseness
and turpitude!
To render this transaction completely infamous, only one
thing more was required, and even that is supplied. When in
terrogated by Dr, Physick, who was shocked at the letter, how
it came into his hands, Mr. Pattison fepUes, that Mrs. Ure " goes
to my lawyer and tells him, I have in my possession a paper
which will ruin Ure, and I will give it up to you on certain
terms." What are the tewns? There is no way in which I can
communicate the expression used on this' occasion, without an
unpardonable outrage on public morals. At one time I medi-
tated resorting for the purpose to the obscuritiets of a learned
language — but in vain! I sought even in the histories of the worst
times of the corruptions of ancient society, for epithets of ade
quate obscenity to convey the sense.
The reader will bear in mind, that Mr. Jeffrey, the accomplish
ed editor of the Edinburgh Review, was the acknowledged law
yer of Mr. Pattison on this occasion !!!
The silence of Dr. Ure, says Mr. Pattison, on the subject of
this letter, during my continuance in Scotland, and the suppres
sion of his work containing it, after it was printed, is a tacit ac
knowledgment of the genuineness of the letter. What was the
motive of Dr. Ure td this step, I have no exact intelligence. But I
remember well, the great uneasiness which Mr. Pattison expres-

23
from the city. I find from the periodical journals, that he
continues to be in full communion with the scientific men
abroad— retains his professorship—and that within the pre
sent year, he was honoured by the attendance of a large
collection of the most eminent citizens, at a lecture in which
he displayed his splendid experiments in galvanism.
That nothing appeared to his prejudice on the memo
rable trial, we have a right to infer from the fact of the di
vorce having been granted, as it is the established practice
of the British courts of law, to withhold such relief^ where
the parties are equally culpable. Even Majesty itself, we
have recently seen, has been compelled to yield to this im
perative dictate of justice, and inexorable usage.*
sed to Dr. Dewees and myself, on seeing an advertisement of
the work in a Glasgow paper, and his subsequent satisfaction on
telling me, that the edition had been cancelled, at the intreaty of
the friends of Mrs. Ure, to prevent a more public exposure of
the filthy affair. If, as Mr. Pattison says, Dr. Ure did it in con
sequence of " one of the actors, who had granted a false decla
ration, coming before the public and making a confession, that
it was destitute of truth, and a statement of all the means, bribes,
threats, &c. which had been employed to obtain it," why is not
the name of this important personage given, as well as all the
circumstances of the case? /
Why, as the letter was so generally, as he says, admitted to
be Dr. Ure's, in Glasgow, have we not indisputable evidence of
it? Where, I finally demand, is the certificate of Mr. Jeffrey, who
is said to have procured the letter.
Either Dr. Ure or Mr. Pattison is the most consummate villain
in existence. The one or the other wrote the letter in question.
The latter is found in possession of it, and let him show how he
got it.
• No small pains are taken by Mr. Pattison to exhibit Dr. Ure
in the most odious Ught, and for -this' purpose, various circum
stances are related with great particularity. Be his character as
black as it is represented, what is to be deduced from it in the

24
Though not directly connected with my subject, it is per-
liaps right, that I should say a word or two in reference to
Mr. Pattison's boasted discovery, since my name has, and
will probably be still more, brought into discussion. Two
present case, I do not perceive. The conviction in the trial for
adultery was not on his evidence, and, hence, whethet he be vi»
cious or otherwise, is wholly aside of the subject. It is not to vin
dicate him, for I know him not, that he is here introduced,
thou.gh I must state that my inquiries about him have ended de
cidedly to his advantage, and that I do deliberately believe be is
most injured and abused. Be this however as it may,, Mr. Pat
tison has been guilty of some of the most abominable falsehoods
concerning him, which it is my intention now to shew.
It appears as above, that he was at first described, by Mr. Pat
tison, in consequence of the affaii; of the Divorce, as a ruined
man, degraded from his station, exiled from his home, and every
where an object of contempt or execration. To Dr. Physick, Dr.
Devirees, myself and others, this was repeatedly told. Contrary
however, to what he then said, it is now confessed that Dr. Ure
still holds his professorship, though the reason assigned for it is
the peculiar nature of the tenure by which a removal is prevent
ed. " The Andersonian Institution, (says Mr. Pattison,) of which
Dr. Ure is a member, is an establishment of late date. The funds
which were obtained for the erection of its buildings were pro
cured by subscription, and as Dr. Ure was veiy active at the
time when the money was raised, in obtaining it, and granted
to the subscribers of 20/. a perpetual ticket of admission, to one
of his courses of lectures, it has become a question, whether the
money given was bestowed oh him as an individual, he granting
personally an equivalent, or to the corporation of the Insthu-
tion. When Dr. Ure, about six years ago, fraudulently stole hia
father's will for the purpose of defrauding his family, an attempt
was made to expel him from the Institution; b;ut as the trustees,
upon taking advice, learnt that his expulsion would involve them
in a tedious litigation, a litigation which would be required to
be carried on by money, advanced by them as individuals, the
attempt was abandoned,, and as he now is a despised and ne-

25
or three months ago, I gave to Dr. Gibson a certificate,
stating that Mr. Pattison had acknowledged to me his fa
miliar acquaintance with Colles' boot, and that the fascia
therein described, differed essentially from the one claimed
glected character, he was permitted to continue connected with
the Institution. The tenure by which he holds his appointment,
and which prevented his expulsion in the former instance, has
in the present, permitted him still to continue in office.'^*
No one can read the above exijracl without being struck with
the awkwardness of its construction, and the improbability of its
statements. Whether there is a foundation for any part of it,
is very questionable. That the Andersonian Institution is not
of a late date, I have most satisfactorily ascertained. Consulting
a work, entitled, " A Picture of Glasgow," I find the following
account :
" The Institution was incorporated on June 9lh, 1796,
by charter from the magistrates of the city. It was established
by the late Mr. John Anderson, Professor of Natural Philosophy
in the University, who for that purpose, by his will, endowed it
with his valuable philosophical apparatus, museum, and library."
The account goes on to state, that Dr. Ure \st\\t present incum
bent of the Philosophical chair, and that his predecessors were
Drs. Garnett and Birbeck.
As to the affair of the will, I have no knowledge. In itself,
it carries Uttle credibility, is sustained by no direct, and is con
futed by very strong presumptive evidence. We are told, in
deed, by Mr. Pattison, that a Mr. Graham writes, we know not
to whom, that " Dr. Ure was only saved from Botany Bay for
fraudulently stealing his father's will." The question immedi
ately occurs, how could he be saved except by an acquittal of
the charge ? Exactly in the same way, and probably with much
more truth, might it be averred, that Mr. Pattison was only
saved from the same destination, and that he now appears as an
" acquitted felon."
The affair to which I allude, requires one word of explana-
Mon. Not long before he came to this country, Mr. Pattison
• Pages 47 and 48 of Mr. P.'s pamphlet.
D

26
by himself, as he would show when he entered on his dis
sections. At this, I understand, he was greatly provoked, and has
accused me of misrepresentation. In reply, I will repeat,
was tried for a felony, in stealing a body from the grave. It was
that of Mrs. M'Callister, a lady of distinction, who died of a dis
ease that excited his curiosity. The friends, however, getting
inteUigence of il, went to his theatre, and demanded the corpse,
which he denied having, undtr solemn protestations, and closed
the doors against their admission. But these were broken qpen,
and they found that during the interval he had been busily en
gaged in mangling and disfiguring the face, so that it might
not be recognized. This account was, some months ago, given
by a Scotch gentleman of character, to General Cadwalader and
myself, and I have since had it confirmed from other sources,
with this addition, that Mr. Pattison merely escaped from the
want of evidence that he had taken the clothes of the deceased :
the part of the offence most penal under the Scotch law.
In every view, it is most ungracious in Mr. Pattison, to bring
forward, at this late hour, such a charge against his quondam
friend and colleague. It is in evidence that the greatest inti
macy prevailed between them, that he was domesticated in the
family of Dr. Ure, and by his own acknowledgment, that up to
the unfortunate affair, he experienced " the most attentive and
flattering demeanour" from him. See Mr. Pattison's pamphlet,
p. 57.
That Dr. Ure is at present much regarded by-the scientific
men of Europe, we have the most satisfactory evidence. The
contributions from him to the journals are numerous, and his
correspondence seems to be eagerly sought. He has, within a
few months, pubUshed a Dictionary of Chemistry, which, is
highly commended by the reviewers, with aUusions to him per
sonally, as a man of great consideration and standing. Those
who have doubts on the subject, may consult the late numbers of
Tilloch's Philosophical Magazine, and Brand's Journal of the
Royal Institution. What, however, is still more conclusive, is

27
that 1 have a most distinct recollection of the fact— having
often mentioned it, and that I am borne out by the testimo
ny of Dr. Hays and Dr. Edward Barton, who heard him,
on another occasion, avow his having read the book previ
ously to his coming to this country.
There is, however, some circumstantial proof, which,
while it sustains me, convicts him of a deliberate attempt in
another instance to impose on us, and through us, tlie medi
cal public of this country.
That he claimed the discovery of the fascia when he first
arrived among us, and has been compelled to relinquish it
to Mr. Colles, is not denied.
Can it be credited, that any man in the position of Mr.
a passage in the dedication of this work to the Earl of Glasgow,
from which it appears, that he enjoys the patroriage and most
friendly countenance of that eminent personage.
" At my outset in life," says he, " your Lordship's distinguish
ed favour cherished those studious pursuits, which have since
formed my chief pleasure and business; and to your Lordship's
hosfdtality, I owe the elegant retirement in which many of the
following pages were written, Ecc." Turning to the biography of
this nobleman, I find, that he has been created an English peer —
that he is Lord Lieutenant of the county of Ayr, and Regent of
the University of Glasgow, and in short, is one of the roost learned
and in every respect distinguished of the peerage.
Living on the spot, and closely connected with the College, he
must,, of course, have known all that had happened in regard to
Dr. Ure. But instead of casting him off, as we might suppose
from the representations of Mr. Pattison, he gives him the
strongest mark of confidence and attachment, by domesticating
him in his family.
The falsehoods of Mr. Pattison in this case, are aggravated by
the basest ingratitude. To Dr. Ure he was indebted for much
kindness, and especially, as I understand, for his appointment
to the Andersonian Institution.

28
Pattison, supposing himself the author of a discovery curi
ous in itself, and of the highest practical import, for such
he has proclaimed it, would not have consulted, and even
diligently scrutinized all the authorities on the subject, and
particularly the treatise of an eminent professor in a
neighbouring college, on the very structure involving it?
Why, too, was it not published in Europe? Certainly he
has shown none of that sensibility which diffidently shrinks
from the press. Nor can we refrain from inquiring why the
great European anatomists, Mr. Cooper, and Dr. Thomp
son, and Dr. Barclay, before whom he tells us he made
the demonstration, and received an explicit recognition of
his title to the discovery, have not alluded to it in their
letters of introduction? Would they, I finally demand,
have omitted so important an incident in the estimate of his
character and pretensions? At all events Mr. Pattison is
hung on the horns of a dilemma from which he cannot ex
tricate himself. Conceding that Cooper, and Barclay, and
Thompson and Dupuytren, did really confess the fascia to
be a structure, prior to the illustration of Mr. Pattison, un
known to them, what becomes of the charge of ignorance
which he has arrogantly cast on Dr. Physick and the rest of
the anatorifiists of this country relative to the subject? *
• It was the detection of this fraud, that brought on the con
troversy between Dr. Gibson and Mr. Pattison, out of which
arose all the subsequent altercations. Totally unable to sustain
himself, he is silent on this point, in his reply tome, and is con
tent that the alleged discovery shall be considered as it now is, a
piece of imposture, originaung in falsehood, advanced with ef
frontery, and finally abandoned in disgrace.
The European critics seem to entertain pretty nearly the same
views of the subject. It was only to-day I had put into my hands
a number of the London Quarterly Journal of Foreign Medi
cine and Surgery, a work of the highest authority, containing

29
The character and conduct of Mr. Pattison, I have now,
perhaps, placed in sufficient relief before the public. It may
possibly be asked, how Dr. Physick and myself came to
countenance an individual of this description. The answer
is plain, and can be given in one word. Ctmfiding in the re
commendatory letters of our friends, and his own plausible
statements,we believed him guiltless of the imputed charges,
and considered him, as doubdess many very honest peo
ple in Baltimore now do, cruelly persecuted.
It was only within a short period I have discovered, that
the whole of the letters from Scotland, to Dr. Physick and
myself, are of a date anterior to the criminal affair — and still
more recently, I have had reasons to believe, that the writers
of some of those letters have expressed their regret at giv
ing them to a person who had proved so unworthy. Certain
it is, and I make the statement, on the authority of two
most respectable men who have lately returned from Glas-
an elaborate notice of Mr. Pattison's controversial writings with
Dr. Gibson^ in which his claim to a discovery is treated with con
tempt, and the practical deductions from it represented to be ut
terly false — with some very strong insinuations of his want of '
candour and integrity in the affair.
In the same spirit and with similar motives, he told Dr.
Physick, Dr. Dewees, and many other of the physicians of this
city on his first arrival, that he had read for membership, before
the Medical Society of Emulation in Paris, the history of several
new and difficult operations which he had performed, with which
they were so much delighted, that waiving all the ordinary forms
he was immediately elected by acclamation. Now from the pro
ceedings of that society in my possession, it appears, that so far
from this being true, they appointed a committee to report on the
communication, who condemn in the harshest terms the opera
tions, as betraying gross diagnostic inaccuracies, and practical
temerity ; insisting on it, that they were done in opposition to all
established principles and authority in surgery.

30
gow, that Mr. Pattison is generally condemned in that city,
and that it was spoken of every where, as a matter of as
tonishment, that he should have been so readily received
into the society of this country.*
• The letters in question, are from the Rev. Dr. Chalmers, of
Glasgow, author of the well-known splendid sermons, and Dr.
King, of the same city. The former writes lo Dr. Mason of
New -York, as follows :
" I lately wrote you, in behalf of Mr. Pattison, of this place,
for a vacant chair in the college of Philadelphia. There has since
broke out upon the public ear a most disagreeable story of a cri
minal intercourse between him and a married lady, in this place.
I have received a letter from himself, upon this subject, in which,
without owning his intercourse, he asks me to suspend my
judgment. I have since written to him to suspend the use of my
recommendations ; and in case you should have said or done any
thing in consequence of what J wrote you on his account, I leave
you to counteract of modify it, in any way you think profier."
" P. S. P'orgive the trouble I put you to, on account of Mr.
Pattison. I wrote his recommendations under the heavy disad
vantage of an entire ignorance of the subject, which became
public some weeks ago, but I deem it altogether fair to yourself
and the College of Philadelphia, to forward this communica-
don." But, says Mr. Pattison, " this letter must have been writ
ten before I came before the public with a refutation of the
charges against me, and consequently cannot, in the slightest de
gree, be considered as militating against my character.*
It appears that the rafutafion came out early in March, t and
Mr. Pattison left England on the 30th of June, so that a period
of three months elapsed, without any change of sentiment on
the part of Dr. Chalmers, or, at least, any acknowledgment of it.
Can it indeed be supposed, had such a change taken place, he
would not, from a sense of justice,, independently of other mo
tives not less operative, hastened to have made the commuiiica-
* Vide Mr. Pattison's pamphlet, p. 49.
¦f Vide Mr. Walker's letter.

31
The object of this address I hope will not be misunder
stood. It is not to vindicate the alleged refusal to meet Mr.
Pattison. Even if I had received a formal challenge, which
I never did, as appears from the correspondence, and how- ,
tion. Two years, however, have elapsed, and not a word is heard
on the subject.
Exactly the same course is pursued by Dr. King, another of
his friends. As sopn as the affair transpires, he writes to Mr.
Stevenson, a correspondent in this city, expressing his deep re
gret at the conduct of Mr. Pattison, and the necessity of his re
voking former recommendations. What, says he, is particular
ly culpable in his conduct, is the obstinate denial of his guilt
against irresistible evidence, aggravating crime by falsehood.
By the abseiice of Mr. Stevenson, I have not been able to
procure this letter for pubUcation. But I have given its contents
as represented to me by several intelligent individuals, by whom
it has been carefully read. Two of the fAref gentlemen of Glasgow,
who gave Mr. Pattison letters, have, therefore recalled them, and
be it remembered, that each of these, has been claimed by hitn,
as a most intimate and particular friend. There are many per
sons in this city, who have heard Mr. Pattison boast of the affec
tionate devotion of Dr. Chalmers to him, and in the first of his
controversional writings in the Recorder, he incidentally notices
the friendship 't>f Dr. King.
The reader who may be in possession of Mr. Pattison's pam
phlet, I wish particularly to notice the account he gives of the
contents of Dr. Chalmers' letter, and also the mode in which he
says I obtained it. The fact is, Dr. Mason, who had been a
patient of mine, calling on me to report the state of his health,
incidentally mentioned, in the course of conversation, that he had
such a letter, and as the design of writing it wjs to counteract a
previous recommendatory one, he had no objection to give it to
me, to be used as I might think proper. He was then on his way
to Baltimore, where he is visited by Mr. Pattison, who begs that
the letter may not be delivered to me, at all events, till the appear
ance of his defence, when he hoped that he would be so convitic-

82
ever pure his character might have heei3, 1 should have at once
declihed it. The disparity of bur agt, the inequality of our
cohdition in sodety, the claims of a numerous faitiilf , and the
obligation imposed by my public station, must have dictated
this decision. It really would seem to me, under any circum
stances, not quite fit to have introduced my course of lectures,
with the spectacle of a duel. The parents and friends of the
several hundrd youngmen confided to my care, require of
ed of his innocence, as to withhold it altogether. For the cor
rectness of this statement, I appeal to Dr. Mason.
Disregarding the most imperative injunctions, the above
letters are continued to be employed by Mr. Pattison, and espe
cially to support his application for the professorship of anatomy
in the College of Lexington. In a newspaper of that city, now
before me, there is a circular letter from President Holley, an
nouncing the election of Mr. Pattison, accompanied with a dis
play of his documents, among which are these very letters— and
this fraud, so abominable in itself, is heightened by a deliberate
falsehood. " The notarial copy of his letter," says he, meaning
Dr. King's, " I have not used:"* and, in relation to that of Dr.
Chalmers, he makes the same sort of denial. Much credit,
however, he assumes for having, previously to his quarrel with
me, mentioned to Dr. McDowell and Revere of Baltimore, his
particular and most confidential friends, the correspondence be
tween Dr. Chalmers and himself. Why, it may here be asked,
if he were really actuated in this instance by a spirit of candour,
did he not make the disclosure general ? or was it delayed to the
last moment? and how happened it that he used the letter at all?
The true cause of the disclosure is well known. Early in the
autumn, one of the professors of the school of Baltimore, with
another distinguished medical man, arrived from Scotland, with
full inteUigence relative to Mr. Pattison, and among other mat
ters of which they spoke, told here and in Baltimore of the re
call of the letters. This disclosure produced great alarm, and
then it was, in agony of heart, he makes the precious confession
* 'Vide Mr. Pattison's pamphlet.

33
the very different things— and assuredly, had I yielded on this
Occasion, I should have had to encounter the heaviest cen
sure, and perhaps a more decisive step from those discreet
and elevated men, under whom I have the honour to hold my
appointment. With Mr. Pattison it is entirely different.; He
is an adventurer with a tainted reputation, which he hoped
to repair*. What has he to lose? and to riiiri the happiness of
a family, we have already Been is one of his sports. Yet
from his manner of receiving Dr. Horner's communication,
there v^ould appear to be some method in his madness, and
Bob^dil like, he displays his valour only, where there is no
possibility of danger.*
., * It cannot have escaped the recollection of the reader of Mr.
Pattison's pamphlet, how artfully he attempts to fix on me the
itr^putalion of a professed duellist, and . of a turbulent and san
guinary spirit, and for this purpose particularly, relates, much
in detail, a story, as he is pleased to term it, of my advising Dr.
Gibson, in, his presence, to resort to this practice, which I had
found so efiScacioUS in silencing hostility—" to blow out the
brains of his opponents," 8ec;.&c. On the appearance of his pub
lication, Dr. Gibsbn wrote to me to the following effect, which I
am induced to lay before the public, as furnishing further,' and
the strongest proof, of Mr. Pattison's total want of veracity.
« You did not propose tb me a junction with Mr. Pattison, in
the Chai%of Surgery— nor did I offer to divide its duties, or even
cmverseWith him oh the subject. 'The slipper, of which he
speaks, was not given ' on my election,' but three days before,
and was not to me, but to Mr. Pattison^ as Dr. M'Clellan will
prove. « Mr. Pattison parted frbm us on leaving Dr. M'Clellan's door.
W^ did not walk- round PPIashin^ton Square. The story about
'blowing out brains,' and so forth, is throughout a fabrication.
Your advice, on the contrary, to me, was to endeavour to con-
ciliate the medical men of the city, by a uniform course ef civility
and mildness, &t. &c." , , v h
g Equairy

"34-
I have now done with Mr. Pattison. Of the public, I
sincerely beg pardon for obtritding oii them such a commu
nication. An appeal of this sort, I sensibly feel is most de
rogatory, and I have long avoidied it. Perhaps it was now un
necessary. Encouraged, hoiyever, by our forbe^raiice, there
seemed to be no end jto the calumnies and mistepresenta-
t^bns, faiseid by Mr. Pattison and his a^iliaries, at the ex-*
pense of Dr. Physick and myself. As a private individual,
we knew his insignificance, and despised His malicious en
deavours. Elevated however as he is, to a niost respeGt?d3i,e .
station, and sustained' by the influence ybich it confers, it
was thought, that he had acquired some iijtiportance, and
that the public mind should be enlightened as to his charac
ter and machinations. N. CHAPMAN.
Philadelphia'^ Ifev. 3, 1820.
P. S. It would really seem iinpossible for Mf.Pattison,
on any occasion to adherei to the truths An impression has
gone abroad, and is now made the siibje^t of a paifagraph in
EqtiaUy jiyifounded is the charge of my having challenged, in
the I^dical Society, a respectable'member of the Society of
Fri^ds. To'pre vent a detection of this falsehood, no individual
is named. But subsequently it is confessed, that the allusion was
to Dr. Parrish. My friend Dr. Harris, without my,ki|i^ledge,
on hearing of this, called on that gentleman, tp inquire into the-
matter, and received from him a positive contradiction of the
tale.' _¦'•¦, ' :¦ •"¦
Concerning the affair with Dr; Dewees, I shall only observe,
that it happened fifteen (jir sixteen years ago ; and if my cqnduct
was reprehensible, I hope I have since atoned fpy it, by a friend
ship warm, iordial aipd sincere.. What, however, will be thought
of the njaUgnity of aipan, who thjus endeavours to disturb the
happiness of families, by references of this nature L!! ,

35
the Baltimore papers— doubtless originating with, or sanc
tioned by him— .that the prosecution against him for send
ing the alleged challenge, was instiga!:ed by myself and some
pthers of the medical faculty, with the hope of detaining him
here, to the injury of the school to whichhe belongs.
Twice did Mr. Biddle in open court, and once to Mr.
Chauncey, in the presence of Mr. Pattison, declare, that the
prosecution was his own act, in which I or others had no
concern, directly or indirectly, and for vtfhich he assumed
the entire responsibility. Nor is Mr. Pattison ignorant^
that .when Mr. S. F. Bradford, with the best intentions^
voluntarily called on me, on the night of the arrest, to ask
my interference for the suppression of the legal proceeding,
lat once expressed my willingness to do so, if any' mode
could be pointed out to effect it, and that I gave assurance
at the same time, in the event of the conviction of Mr. Pat
tison, I would instantly in person apply to the executive for
his pardon.

; P. S. In the estirhatewhichlhadformed of the character
o^ the "gentlenien of Baltimore, who incautiously, on a
stMetaent entirely ex parte, vindicated ' by a certificate, the
innocence of Mr. Pattison," I was deceived.* They have,
iii defepite of the appeal niade to their honour, and of the
ne'w ahd distinct light shed on the affair, by the authentic evi-
denee in the preceding official documents, a!dhered to their
former decision-^and with a view of piJOtectihg thesame in
dividual, have caused the fact to be published. It therefore
becpiraes my duty, however reluctant I thayb6, to show that -
these gentlemen have acted unworthily, and that their opinion
though so solemnly delivered, is entitled to only, and pre
cisely the same weight, as th6 representations of their friend
Mr. Pattison himself.
* Vide Preface to the-DociimiJnts; page 7v

66
The question will naturally be; asked by every one, why
did they take on themselves this insidious office ? As the
charge against Mr. Pattison had been a matter of legal in
vestigation, what could be, were he innocent, more easy than;
his exculpation ? Why was not the precise case on which
the court acted, that convicted him, laid before the public,
and their corruption, or the insufficiency ofthe evidence, by
which they were governed, exposed ?
Choosing, however, forany reason, to assume jurisdictipiv
in the case, did not common decency, independently of more
sacred obligations, require, that all the facts should have
been placed before them? Desirous of the establishment
of truth,'and the dispensation of equal and exact justice,
would they have not called on the accuser to make out and
substantiate his allegations ? No invitation is made of this
nature. Every part of the complainant's case is, on the
contrary, kept back, and they proceed, ex cathedra, to the
delivery of their decision, without hearing, or even solicit
ing, one tittle of criminatory evidence !
Nor is this, by any means, the least reprehensible part of
their conduct. To allow the culprit to escape with impu
nity, a lengthened catalpgue of documents is imposed on the
public, which have no hearing on the immediate charge, and
hardly the remotest relation to the subject.
Even here, concealment would seem Jo be desigoRl. The
documents, for the most part, are enumerated^ not given in
extenso, lest their real chs^raetef and import might appear.
Examined carefully, it will be found, that of the whole of
this parade of papers there are, indeed, only two, virhich
can be considered as in the slightest degree exculpatoryj.
and these are carefully printed dt length,' '
CERTIFICATE.
Being requested by Granville Sharpe Pattison, Esq. Pro
fessor of Surgery in the University of Marylatid, to examine
a series of Letters and Documents, relative to the causes of
his coming to the United States, with the view of becoming
Professor of Apatomy in the University of Pennsylvania;

37
and also in relation to a charge made against him by Dr.
Andrew- Ure, of Qlasgow;— the undersigned examined.
said letters and documents, and are satisfied, lst„That said
letters and documents are genuine, and were written and
' made at the time, and in the manner, they respectfully pro
fess to be 5 and, 2dly, That the charge of adulterous inter-_
course between Mr. Pattison and Jlrs. Ure, is wholly destitute
of foundation. The letters and docuwfents examined by us, are as fol
lows :
1st. Letters from John Pattison, Esq. of Philadelphia,
to Granville S. Pattison, Esq. of Glasgow, of the following
dates: irth November, 1818; 8th and 14th January, 1819;
23d, 25th, and 26th March, 1819; 14th, 17th, and 20th
April, 1819.
2d. Letter from Granville Sharpe Pattison, Glasgow, to
John Pattison, Philadelphia, 20th February, 1819.
3d. Letter of Sir William Adams, Lontlon, to G. S. Pat
tison, 26th May, 1819.
4th. Letter; from Dr. W. P. Dewees, Philadelphia, to
G. S. Pattison, 20th April, 1819.
5th. Letter from Sir James M'Gregor, London, to Dr.
Francis, New- York, 28th 'May,: 1819.
6th. Letter from Dr. Barclay to Dr. Mease, Philadel
phia, 19th May, 1819.
rthv Letter from David Walker, Esq. of Philadelphia, then
in Glasgow, to John Pattison, Esq.'of Philadelphia, 30th
March, 181-9.
Sth. Letter from Mr. John Scott, Glasgow, to G. S. Pat-
tison, 10th March, 1819.
9th. Letter from Alexander Stevens, Glasgow, to G. S.
Pattison, lOth March, 1819.
10th, Facv sirtiile of a letter from Dr. Andrew Ure, to
Catharine Ure, 12th Oct. 181S.
11th. Reclaiming petition of Catharine Ure, i2th. Febru
ary, 1819..
12th. Glasgow newspapers, 6th and 27th March, 1819,
containing Granville S. Pattison's advertisement, relative to

38
his pamphlet, and calling on Dr. Ure arid bis wife to ex
hibit their charge and evidence.
I3th. Granville S. Pattison's paihphlet, repelling Dr.
Ure's charge; read publicly in Glasgow, 26th March,
1819,*
R. SMITH,
JOHN M. DUNCAN,

W^. WINDER,
A.%1

IISBET.
What, however, I wish ' particularly to call attention to,
as of a still higher tone of culpability, is the studious sup
pression of evidence which has been practised in the case.
The reclaiming petition of Mrs. Ure, in which the guilt of
her husband is set forth in the strongest colours, is included ,
among the documents, while her letter, to tht court, accom
panied by an oath that it- was '^ written by herself of her own
free will and motive," denying the truth of the contents of
the reclaimer, and that it was signed, by her without being
aware of its pu,rport, thrqttgh^fhe artifices of Mr. PattisQn\i
agents, is withheld.\ , •,
Exactly of the same character is their conduct in relaT
tion to the celebrated letter purporting to be froni Dr. Ure
to his wife, in the assertion of its genuineness. An inquiry
is here suggested as to the degree and kind of evidence on
which this opinion was fbrmed. Eircepting the simple de-:
claration of the party interested, I do aver, and challenge
contradiction, that they proceeded on grounds wholly gra-
tuitPtiS. No one pf these individuals' was acquainted with
the hand-writing of Dr. Ure, and they came to this hasty
and unwarrantable conclusion against all intrinsic probabi
lity^ merely from a fac simile furnished by Mr. Pattison;
, himself, with no standard of comparisPn, or any other just
rule of determination.
• These then, are the iJocuments on 'w^ch the judgment of the self-crea-
ferf tribunal of BalSmore decided. Let th^m be contrasted with the real v
evidence in the ease.
j^ fThe reader will not permit this circumstance to escape. HewiUfind
the papers referred to inp. 31, 33, and' 33, of the Documents.

89
That this most infamous letter is the fabrication pf Mr.
Pattison, for the diabolical purpose of destroying the repu
tation of his patron and friend Dr. Ure, is shown by evidence
which cannot be resisted. The letter bears date the 12th
October, 1818 ; and it appears frpm the testimony of one of
the witnesses on the trial, as well as by the cpufession of
Mrs. Ure herself, that aseparation had taken place between
her and herhusbaud on the 13th August previous. *
Can we, therefore, independently of all other improbabi
lities, for one moment suppose, that a correspondence of
this, or any other description, should, under these circum
stances, have beeii carried on between the parties ? What
possible motive can be assigned fpr his addressing such a
letter to her, with whom he had ceased td have any inter
course, and who indeed could hardly be considered any
longer his wife ? Even stronger proof however is afforded
by th.e fapt, that the letter >yas never brought to light, till
aJPter the completipti of the trial ! During the pei^dency of
the case, Mrs. Ure, as appears from the dpcume.nts, was
concealed from her friends by Mr. Pattison, and subjected
entirely to his control, why then was not the letter produced,
which, at once, mu^t h^ye silenced the allegations of Dr.
yre, and to use th? legal phrase, " tu^n^d hint out pf court .'"
The ri:ason obviously is, thaj bad this been done, its ge-
nuji^ene^s would have been canvassed by a campetent tribu
nal, and the fabrication detected, But hpw did the letter uL
timately come to light? When questioned pn the subj.ect,
Mr. Pattison tells Dr. Physick and Dr. Dewees, as well as
others iu this city, that it was given by Mrs. Ure to Mr.
Jeffrey, his lawyer, on an express con4ition th^t he should
become her para,mo,>«"! Where is the testimony of Mr.
Jeffrey to this fact ? What, however, is conclusive, on the
appearance of the letter, Mrs. Ure gave a certificate on oath
th^t it was spurious. Though this document is notnow in my
ppssession, I can procure it, and shall be prepared to show,
when necessary; that the letter was a fabrication of Mr.
* Vide Dostunents, p. 25 and 3*.

40
Pattison and his friend Mr. Burn, and subsequendy, that by
their machinations, this miserably de^aded woman was led
to tht commission of perjury, for their exculpation;. That
they were capable of a conspiracy of this sort, independently
of other evidence, who can doubt, when their conduct is ad
verted to in relation to the " Reclaiming Petition," an act, in
eVery view, not less enormously wicked.*
¦ As to the charge of adultery with Mrs. Ure, I deem it
sufficiently established, by the decision of the legal tribunal,
which tried the case. But since the " gentlemen who look
ed over the documents," still avow their unaltered convic
tion, of its being " wholly unfounded," itts proper I should
state, for the benefit of thpse who may in any degree be in-;
fluenced by their authority, that I can command the testi
mony of three of the, most respectable of our citizens to
prove that Mr. Pattison himself confessed, on his first arri
val in this country, that he had carried on an int/igue, the
details of which were m'entioned.^ -with this unhappy woman,
and on comparison of dates, it will be found, at thievery time
when she was most intimate with the females of his family,
and especially with an unmarried sister.
Of the import of the preceding charges I am fully aware,
and have < not preferred them unadvisedly. Thejevidence
by which they are sustained has been accurately scaned,
and with that ailready presented, will be forth coming,
should Mr. Pattison, in some disastrous moment, have the
temerity to calf me into a court of law for the vindication
of his character. Challenged again and again to such an
investigation, he has as uniformly shrunk from it, preferring
in the exercise of a sound discretion, to he sworn out by
a, set of compurgators, who, with a noble disinterestedness,
have been found ready at all times to assert his inhocence
at the sacrifice of their own reputation.
'¦' ,r N. C.
Nov. 1822. 'V.
* The reader is particularly requested to turn to the account of this
transaction Vide Documents, p. 38. For the character of Mf. Bum, con
sult p. 8, of th? Documents.

41
To rectify the public mind on a subject which has been
much misrepresented, I submit the following statement,
which appeared in the Philadelphia papers.
To the Public of Philadelphia. * «
It was my intention, after the transaction recited in the
late addsess of Mr. Granville Sharpe Pattison, to abstain
from notieing any thing which he might publish on the sub
ject. I was aware, that he would take advantage of the
occasion, to fabricate a tale, which might bring him again
within the view of the public, and attract some additional
sympathy to his case, heretofore, and with infinite pains,
represented as wonderfully pitiable. Biit I was at the same
time sure, that his statement would be, as it is, of a com
plexion to betray its own falsehood, and I was not sorry
that he himself should make more extensively ktiown the
well merited treatment of which he now so sorely com
plains. In reflecting on the matter, however, it has occurred to
me, that there is an apology due on my part, to my fellow
citizens, for the breach of public order and decorum which
I am conscious of having committed in the personal attack
upon Mr. Pattison, and that it would be well to accom
pany the apology with some general explanations, tending
to counteract the distorted aspect which he has given to the
transaction. As relates to the man, I can feel no regret for What I
have done. Nor is he, I am persuaded, much dissatisfied
with the occurrence. Notoriety is his great object, and to
find an oppoltunity of figuring before the public as a perse
cuted and oppressed stranger, he would make almost any
personal sacrifice— not attended with any serious danger. It
formed the motive to his original selection of me as an an
tagonist, to the sagacious and prudent neglect of others,
who had given him formal and repeated invitations to that
effect. F

42
Yet, no one is more sensible than myself, that it became
peither my profession, station ip society, time pf life, nor
my general principles and cpurse of condt^ct, tq commit
such an act of violence in the streets, upon an individual,
however culpable and vile. The example is intrinsieally
had-r-it is such as I should condemn in anothet, ^nd cannot
Undertake to justify in myself, I have therefore only the
palliative to offer, of the sudden and irresistible excitement^
which caused me to forget what was due tp myself and tp
the community.
The nature of my relation with Mr. Pattison, previous tp
the affair now in agitation, is sufficiently notorious. It pre
disposed me, ^s it would have predisposed a more phlegma
tic temperament thap mine, to a momentary heat, when he
should«f»ll under sight for the first time, after the publica
tion of the pamphlet to which he refers,
It happened pn the mprning of the 7th instant, the day on
W^iich he made his appearance here, that I went out with
Mrs. Chapman to pay a visit to her mother, whp re
sides in Spruce, near Fourth street. I bad wjth me a light
stick, which I usually carry. A^ we were walking dowp
Walnut street, I perceived on the, opposite side Mr- Pattir
son with a companion, following in the same direction. He
continued in this course for two squares, frequently casting
his eye upon me, in a manner which I thought significant. I
turned on the right iiito Fourth street, leaving Mr. Pattispu
^bout twenty or thirty yards behind me in conversation with
a gentleman who had stopped to address him. Conducting
Mrs. Chapman to ?ome distance down Fourth street, I
mentioned to her that J was obliged to leave her at that mo
ment, having a call to make in Chesnut street, and request
ed my brother-in-law, whp had accidentaUy fallen in with us
9. short time before, to continue his walk with her. My imr
pression was, that neither of them had perceived Mr. Patti-
fon, and I so directed the conversation ^luring the yfalk, as

43
that it might be prevented. Contrary to expectation, for I
had reason to believe that he would .have been detained in
the position in which I left him, entirely out of the view of
my wife, I encountered him turning the corner of Walnut
street with his companion, and having apprised him of, my
intention, dealt him several blows. In the meanwhile, Mrs*
Chapman, who had seen him in our walk, concealing how
ever the circumstance from me, under the idea that he had
escaped my observation, became so uneasy as to be induced
to return in pursuit of me with all speed, and reached the
scene of the aifray after I had inflicted the blows, and when
a peace officer and some persons in the neighbourhood were
properly interfering. Mr. Pattison appeared to me to make
no resistance till I was seized, and then so extremely agi
tated was he^ as to be incapable of giving a blow.
In vigour offrame he is at least my equal, and the wea
pon I emplbyed was top slight to place him on an inequality.
, j need do no more than repel with scorn his insinuation
that I either planned or took advantage of the presence of
Mrs. Chapmdn on the occasion. Those of whose esteem
I am desirous, will not believe that I, or any other man,
weuld expose his wife in this way. Mr. Pattison has very
' adroitly, as he supposes, improve4 the incident of her pre
sence, which had, in fact, not the least influence, and, of
course, has no relevancy to_ the case. But the manner in
\yhich he uses it, apd the very introduction of a lady thus
gratuitously, with the expectation that her feelings must be
torn by being 4ra^ged before the public, wiU serve to illus
trate the coarseness, malice, and artfulness of the man.
He informs the world, in italics, that he was, at the time
he was struck, bound over to keep ^the peace. Had this
been so, it could not have included self-defence, or have=de-r
prived him of that advantage whep attacked. The fact,
however, is, that (lis recogyiizance'dxptred six months ago !
There is one point more in his statement, to which I

44
think it well to advert, before I close this explanation, al-
ft^dy too long. He remarks^ that " a suit at law is foreign.'
to his feelings, and incompatible with ihis convenience," and
takes much credit to himself for his ft^bearance. ¦ His scru.; .
pies indeed in this instanee, are very Convenient, because I
stand prepared, and he well knows it, to substantiate in ci
court of justice, when called into one, all the charges which!
I have ever made against his moral character.
N. CHAPMAN.
May 14tf 1821.