Publication information
view printer-friendly version
Source: Carolina Medical Journal
Source type: journal
Document type: editorial
Document title: “The Remuneration of President McKinley’s Doctors”
Author(s): anonymous
Date of publication: January 1902
Volume number: 48
Issue number: 1
Pagination: 1-2

“The Remuneration of President McKinley’s Doctors.” Carolina Medical Journal Jan. 1902 v48n1: pp. 1-2.
full text
McKinley physicians (payment).
Named persons
James A. Garfield; William McKinley.


The Remuneration of President McKinley’s Doctors

     We notice that this subject is being discussed in some of the newspapers, and we trust it will be taken up by Congress at an early date and the accounts satisfactorily adjusted. Congress surely does not need to be reminded that these services were rendered to Mr. McKinley not as an ordinary citizen, but as President of the United States. The obligation is a National one and should not be a charge against the martyred President’s estate. In the case of President Garfield, this obligation was recognized by Congress, but if our memory serves us, there were some unnecessary discussion and some rather unseemly haggling over the settlement. It is not the part of outsiders to determine the value of these services or to suggest the size of the fees, but it is evident that these latter should be proportioned to the eminence of the patient, the importance of these services, the standing of the attendants, and the responsibility of the case. It is not inappropriate or indelicate to call attention to the fact that the mere risks to professional reputations involved in such a momentous and critical case are certainly as great as, if not greater than, any risks assumed by any proffessional [sic] men in any other circumstances whatever. From the legitimate business standpoint, such risks are not among those which physicians and surgeons can afford to assume for mere sentiment or should be called upon to meet without ample compensation. [1][2] The medical conduct of the lamented President’s case was conspicuously free from selfish, jealous, unworthy motives. The physicians and surgeons performed a grave public duty without a taint of self-seeking or of vainglory. It is appropriate now that they should be well remunerated by the American people.
     We regard the above, copied from an exchange, as a very clear statement of this much-discussed question, giving as it does what would seem unanswerable reasons for the contention of the present surgeons that their fees should be paid by the National government and not by the estate of the deceased.



top of page