Publication information
view printer-friendly version
Source: Journal of the American Osteopathic Association
Source type: journal
Document type: editorial
Document title: none
Author(s): anonymous
Date of publication: November 1901
Volume number: 1
Issue number: 2
Pagination: 69

[untitled]. Journal of the American Osteopathic Association Nov. 1901 v1n2: p. 69.
full text
McKinley assassination (personal response); William McKinley (medical care: criticism).
Named persons
William McKinley.



     Since our last issue the world has been profoundly shocked and grieved by the murder of President McKinley. To the people of the United States, particularly, his death was felt as a personal affliction. People of all shades of political opinion had learned to love him, not alone for his patriotic statesmanship, but for his beautiful private life and his exemplification of lofty Christian virtues.
     A great deal has been said in the newspapers and medical journals about the treatment given the distinguished patient by the physicians and surgeons in charge. So far as the surgical treatment of the stomach wounds is concerned no criticism can be offered; but the medical and dietetic management of the case ought to be characterized as fatal blundering from beginning to end. The story is one of untold hypodermics of morphine, strychnine, codeine and digitalis and many useless and exhausting enemas, nutrient and other, leading up to the crowning mistake, on the sixth day after the infliction of the wound, when solid food was given. From that hour the president failed rapidly, in spite of, and maybe because of, the heart-sickening exhibiton [sic] of castor oil, calomel and a heroic series of useless and deadly stimulants. Let us hope that the newspaper report that the president's physicians have sent in a bill for $100,000 is a gross exaggeration.



top of page