History: Abraham Lincoln's Suit Against a Medical Imposter Who Assaulted His Client

Journal of Community Health, Vol. 26, No. 5, October 2001 ( 2001)

HISTORY

ABRAHAM LINCOLN’S SUITAGAINST A MEDICAL IMPOSTER WHO

ASSAULTED HIS CLIENT

Allen D. Spiegel, PhD, MPH; Florence Kavaler, MD, MPH

ABSTRACT: In 1851, A. Lincoln, Esquire represented Edward Joneswho charged in a law suit that his attending physician had assaulted him.Jones, also a lawyer, had sharply questioned Dr. Joseph S. Maus abouthis claims of attendance and graduation from Philadelphia’s JeffersonMedical College, an allopathic medical school. Jones claimed that Mausbecame enraged at his persistent questioning and attacked him. In turn,Maus denied the allegation. He said that he was merely defending him-self from Jones’ blows with a large cane. Lincoln’s legal approach was toargue about the state of medical education and whether Maus had reallygraduated from Jefferson Medical College. Acting as a peacemaker, hefinally arranged to settle the dispute between Jones and Maus out ofcourt.

KEY WORDS: Abraham Lincoln; lawyer; law suit; medical education; JeffersonMedical College.

ASSAULT AND BATTERY?

In 1851, Abraham Lincoln (Figure 1) represented Edward Jones inhis Trespass Vi Et Armis suit against Dr. Joseph S. Maus for $5,000.00 indamages. Essentially, Jones alleged that Maus assaulted him with force ofarms. There was a heated imbroglio between the two over Maus’ claimthat he had graduated from the Jefferson Medical College in Philadelphia.When Jones persisted in questioning whether Maus had really graduated

Allen D. Spiegel, PhD, MPH, and Florence Kavaler, MD, MPH, are both Professors, Depart-ment of Preventive Medicine and Community Health, State University of New York, Downstate Medi-cal Center, College of Medicine, 450 Clarkson Avenue, Box 43, Brooklyn, NY 11203.

Requests for reprints should be addressed to Dr. Allen D. Spiegel, SUNY, Downstate Medi-cal Center, 450 Clarkson Avenue Box 43, Brooklyn, NY 11203.

Adapted, with permission, from Spiegel AD. A. Lincoln, Esquire: A Shrewd, Sophisticated Litiga-tor, Macon, Georgia: Mercer University Press, 2001.

383

0094-5145/01/1000-0383$19.50/0 2001 Human Sciences Press, Inc.

384 JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY HEALTH

FIGURE 1Abraham Lincoln as he appeared when he practiced law in Illinois

(National Archives, Library of Congress).

Allen D. Spiegel and Florence Kavaler 385

from that medical school, the latter became enraged and ferociously as-saulted Jones. In his defense, Maus said that he was not guilty, contendedthat Jones was the aggressor and that he was merely defending himself.

MEDICAL COLLEGE GRADUATE: “INFAMOUSLY FALSE”

By the time he accepted this case, Lincoln had already practiced inthree law firms: Stuart & Lincoln, Logan & Lincoln and Lincoln & Hern-don (Figure 2). Within a seven year period, he was the junior partner toboth John T. Stuart and Stephen T. Logan. Although the law firm of Lin-coln & Herndon had existed since December 1844, Lincoln frequently par-ticipated in cases with other lawyers as co-counsel. As he traveled fromcourthouse to courthouse on the 450 mile long Eighth Judicial Circuit, locallawyers frequently asked Lincoln to assist them on a variety of law suits. Atleast seventy-five other lawyers on the circuit were associated with him.

William B. Parker was Lincoln’s co-counsel in Jones v. Maus. Parkerfiled Jones’ affidavit with the Tazewell County Circuit Court in Pekin, Illi-nois on July 24, 1851.1 On the same day, Joseph S. Maus and his brotherposted a bond to assure his appearance at the trial on September 10, 1851:“We Joseph S. Maus and William S. Maus of the County of Tazewell andState of Illinois are holden and firmly bound unto William Gaither, Sheriff

FIGURE 2Typical arrangement of the law office of Lincoln & Herndon

(Frank Leslie’s Illustrated, December 22, 1860.


of said County of Tazewell in the final sum of four thousand dollars goodand lawful money of the United States.”2 If James S. Maus did not showup for the trial, that bond money could be used to pay the damagesawarded to Jones. If the case went to trial and Jones won but James S Mausdid not pay, William S. Maus would be held accountable.

At one point during the physician–patient conversation immedi-ately preceding the assault, Maus told Jones that his Jefferson Medical Col-lege diploma was at his house. In his declaration, Jones swore that thisstatement by Maus was “infamously false, the said Maus at said time beingneither a graduate of said Jefferson Medical College nor of any other char-tered medical school.” According to Jones, the assault by Maus developed“without any undesirable cause of provocation whatever.” Jones swore thatMaus “made an assault upon affiant [Jones] and struck him either with hisfist or some felonious weapon on or over the left eye and has dischargedthe sight thereof.” At the time of the attack, Jones did not see any weaponin Maus’ hands. Witnesses told him that they did not see any weapon.Nevertheless, “affiant [Jones] believes that he can prove from the characterof the injury sustained that it is not probable that it was done with thefist.” Offering proof of his belief, Jones said that a few days later Maus“exhibited in a boasting manner an instrument said to be used by noneother than felonious and cowardly highway men, murderers and house-breakers” such as a colt [gun]. Furthermore, Jones contended that he hadbeen informed and believes that “such an instrument may be used in amanner so as not to be perceived.” Jones declared that “by professionaffiant [he] is an attorney and counselor-at-law in good practice and wasso at the time of the commission of said assault. That his family and him-self depend upon the income derived from the practice and that the lossof the sight of said eye injured by said Maus affects materially the abilityof the affiant [Jones] to perform his professional duties.” He sued for$5,000.00 in damages.3

On September 1, 1851, Parker filed Jones’ terse one page com-plaint against Maus:4

Edward Jones, Plaintiff, by Parker his attorney, complains of Joseph B.Maus, defendant in custody, of an action of trespass vi et armis. Thatsaid defendant here-to-fore to wit on the first day of December in theyear of our Lord of eighteen hundred and fifty at the county and circuitaforesaid made an assault upon said plaintiff and beat and wounded him. . . against the peace and laws of the State of Illinois.

Maus Alleges Self-Defense

On September 23, 1851, Horace P. Johnson, Benjamin S. Pretty-man, and James Haines, Maus’ lawyers, filed a response to Jones’ com-


plaint. These defense lawyers declared that Jones “ought not to have ormaintain his aforesaid action against” Maus. In the reply to Jones’ com-plaint, Maus averred that “at said time of the beating, wounding and othermisfortune” Jones attacked him with a “large cane and would then andthere have struck and beat” him. “Wherefore he, the said defendant, didthen and there defend himself against the said plaintiff, as he lawfullymight for the cause aforesaid.” In defending himself, Maus stated that he“did necessarily and unavoidably strike with his hand the said plaintiff andslightly wounded him doing no further unnecessary damage to said plain-tiff on the occasion aforesaid . . . which is the same supposed mishap insaid declaration mentioned and whereof the said plaintiff hath above com-plained against him.” Maus stated that he was ready to verify the facts andhis lawyers “prayed for judgment” in his favor.5

LINCOLN AND MEDICINE

This Jones v. Maus suit focused on a medical controversy about vari-ous types of physicians and their professional education. Lincoln was wellaware of the ambivalent contemporary condition of the art and science ofmedicine. His knowledge of medicine singularly augmented his participa-tion in this law suit. During his years in New Salem, Illinois, he was anactive participant in a discussion group convened by his good friend, Dr.John Allen. While living there he was well acquainted with Drs. CharlesChandler and Francis Regnier. Two of Lincoln’s brothers-in-law were phy-sicians, Drs. George Todd and William Wallace. A number of Lincoln’spolitical associates were active physicians such as Drs. Anson Henry, Wil-liam Jayne, John Logan, Charles Ray, and J.A. Vincent. He had more thana fleeting knowledge of the public’s attitudes toward physicians thatranged from hostile to skeptical and ungrateful, and from cynical to appre-ciative and thankful. Furthermore, Lincoln could converse with his medi-cal associates to prepare himself for the Jones v. Maus trial. Specifically,Lincoln had to inquire about the process of medical education and thecurrent local modalities in the practice of medicine.

WHY NO MEDICAL COLLEGE DIPLOMA?

In his preparation for the trial, Lincoln may have discovered sev-eral rationales for Maus’ lack of a Jefferson Medical College diploma: hecould have attended some lectures but not all; he could have left beforehe met the school’s graduation requirements; he did not serve his appren-


ticeship with a practitioner; or he could have merely purchased the admis-sion tickets to the medical lectures and actually attended few or none.6

Often, admission tickets to the lectures served as the only proof of themedical student’s attendance and met the requirements for graduation.Admission tickets ranged in price from ten to fifteen dollars per lecture.Those funds paid a faculty member’s salary.

In a history of the medical profession published in 1901, Dr. Alex-ander Wilder claimed that nine out of ten practitioners never graduatedfrom any medical educational institution.7 Was Maus among those ninemedical practitioners without a medical education? Therefore, informa-tion about Jefferson Medical College, Maus’ alleged alma mater, was vitalto the advancement of Lincoln’s law suit.

JEFFERSON MEDICAL COLLEGE

Jefferson Medical College was founded in Philadelphia in 1824 byDr. George McClellan and his colleagues. On April 19, 1826, the first classgraduated. From 1841 to 1856, the achievements of the college’s famousfaculty established Jefferson Medical College’s sterling reputation.8

Shortly, Jefferson Medical College’s faculty was unsurpassed at any othermedical college in America. Students were attracted from all over theUnited States and from many foreign countries. A study by the AmericanMedical Association (AMA) detailed the specifics of the Jefferson MedicalCollege in comparison with the other schools. Medical education require-ments and the seventeen week curriculum at Jefferson Medical Collegewere typical of the nation’s schools (Figure 3). Pertinently, the curriculumincluded lectures in medical jurisprudence. Obligatory requirements at Jef-ferson Medical College did not include dissecting, hospital attendance waslimited, and examinations were conducted privately by each professor.

A contemporary report of the AMA Committee on Medical Educa-tion evaluated medical education and delivered a devastating evaluationof the state of the art:9

The curriculum of instruction should be materially, if not completely,reformed. It has undergone no thorough improvement except in a veryfew of the schools, during the last half century. It is, in fact, essentiallythe same now as it was at the death of Dr. [Benjamin] Rush in 1813.

Maus’ alleged school, Jefferson Medical College, was one of thelargest private medical colleges in the country. An exceedingly large num-ber of students in the United States enrolled and graduated from this


FIGURE 3Aspects of the curriculum of the Jefferson Medical College,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1849.

school. Each year, from 1844 to 1849, Jefferson Medical College averaged465 admissions and 166 graduates. However, only about thirty percent ofthe enrolled students ever earned a medical degree.10

Despite the misgivings about medical education, only three states(Alabama, North Carolina, Virginia) required more than a diploma for


evidence of competency to obtain a license to practice.11,12 State licenserequirements for physicians started to collapse in the 1830s. As late as1876, Dr. Austin Flint observed that there are “no legal restrictions forpracticing without a diploma or license.”13

WAS MAUS INCOMPETENT?

In their medical encounters, Maus may have appeared incompe-tent to Jones. Even as late as the mid-1850s, physicians often made diagno-ses without taking the patient’s pulse, without the benefit of a clinical ther-mometer or without using a stethoscope. A fading treatment mode usedby physicians who received their education at orthodox medical schoolsinvolved reducing the “convulsive action” via blistering, blood-letting and/or the use of calomel for purging.14,15,16,17 Relevant to the Jones v. Maus case,Lincoln gathered information about the status of medical education andpatterns of community practice at the time. It is quite possible that Lincolnthought that Maus did not graduate with a degree from a chartered medi-cal school. There were a variety of contemporary pathways for Maus tofollow to become a medical healer. In so doing, Maus could adapt or incor-porate into his medical practice a host of alternative healing regimens. Toearn a living, these variegated healers enthusiastically competed with eachother to attract patients.

Alternative Medical Healers

Every day, potential jurors in the Jones v. Maus case as well as Lin-coln read the medical care advertisements in the local newspapers. A com-posite of advertisements from the front page columns of the Daily IllinoisState Journal illustrate the wide ranging scope of medical healing offered,and publicized, to people in the mid-west in the 1850s. Ill people couldreadily purchase remedies for a motley assortment of complaints: balsamof horehound for a cough; German or Holland bitters for a disorderedliver; drops to cure Cholera; a hair restorative for bald heads; CherokeeIndian liniment for rheumatism; female pills for dangerous and painfuldisorders; and Holloway’s irresistible pills to restore the stomach. Physi-cians proclaimed their availability day or night, offered home visits, adver-tised non-surgical treatment of cancers, tumors and ulcers at the sametime that Dr. Wesley Grindle offered a celebrated magic compound tocure the impure state of the blood. Paid medical advertisements from asfar away as New York appeared in the columns on the front pages of the


Illinois newspapers (Figure 4). Obviously, a broad spectrum of dubious,but well advertised, healing choices were available to the public.

With allegedly rational considerations, ailing individuals rejectedthe existing routinely prescribed draconian medical measures. With un-bounded zeal, alternative healers fueled a revolt against the overuse ofpopularly dispensed remedies using arsenic, antimony, lead, mercury,

FIGURE 4Medical advertisements on the front page of the Daily

Illinois State Journal.


harsh purgatives, salts, bleeding and leeches. Regular or orthodox medicaltreatment was viewed as a lethal combination of depletion and toxic lethal-ity: “The seeds of disease and death, are sown in the vitals of society, bythe use of poisonous medicines.”18

Reverend Sylvester Graham and his adherents in the popularhealth movement advocated a Spartan regimen to promote good health.They advocated a no-meat diet, no tea, no coffee, no alcohol, fresh air,exercise, cleanliness, cold bathing, and the avoidance of tightly laced cor-sets.19

Samuel Thomson adapted the traditional remedies of the Ameri-can Indians. He patented medical mixtures of vegetable drugs in a botanicsystem that was popularly labeled steaming, peppering and puking.12,20

Based on the utilization of practical experiences with all the knowntherapeutic modalities, Drs. Alva Curtis and Wooster Beach promoted aneclectic medical approach to healing therapies. An extensive history of theAmerican Eclectic Practice of Medicine explained the melding of existingtheories into an acceptable therapy for the common people.7

In Germany, Dr. Samuel Hahnemann originated homeopathy as atreatment technique. By 1844, the American Institute of Homeopathy, thefirst national medical organization in the nation, espoused that path to ahealthier life. In Latin, the homeopathic slogan was Simile similis cura, noncontratium [Like cures its like, and not that which is contrary].14,15

Interestingly, the legal profession also engaged in “irregular” train-ing throughout the nation at the time. Lawyers “read” with practicing at-torneys, or by themselves as Lincoln did. They did not have to graduatefrom a college level law school.

MAUS AND MEDICAL EDUCATION

Maus could have received his medical education in alternativeschools, or even through self-learning, in specialties such as botanic medi-cine, eclectics, homeopathy, hydropathy, mesmerism, phrenology, spiritu-alism or vegetarianism.21Numerous profit-making sectarian medicalschools existed where Maus could become a “doctor” much quicker andeasier than attending an orthodox medical college. If an individual wantedto become a botanic doctor or a homeopath, there were self-learningbooks and supplies that bypassed formal schools. For five dollars, aspiringhomeopaths received an instruction book accompanied by a beginners’kit of medications called “infitesimals.” Mary Edwards Walker, already aneclectic physician, attended the Hygeio-Therapeutic College in New York


City for about three months and earned another medical diploma.22,23 Na-tionwide, about twenty to thirty-five percent of hydropaths were womenand about fifty percent of the prior graduates of this specific New YorkCity water-cure medical school were women.24

LINCOLN’S LEGAL ARGUMENTS RE MEDICAL EDUCATION

Within this environment of a variegated assortment of orthodoxand alternative medical practitioners, medical education became a criticaland integral part of Lincoln’s probable legal arguments in Jones v. Maus.Lincoln could have cited Dr. Nathan S. Davis’ devastating evaluation ofcurrent medical education programs that appeared in in the New York Med-ical Journal in 1845:25

All the young man has to do is gain admittance in the office of somephysician, where he can have access to a series of ordinary medical text-books, and see a patient perhaps once a month, with perhaps a hastyport-mortem examination once a year; and in the course of three yearsthus spent, one or two courses of lectures in the medical colleges, wherethe whole science of medicine, including anatomy, physiology, chemis-try, materia medica, pathology, practice of medicine, medical jurispru-dence, surgery, and midwifery are all crowded upon his [the student’s]mind in the short space of sixteen weeks . . . and his education, both pri-mary and medical, is deemed complete.

Active in medical circles, Davis became AMA President in 1864 and 1865.11

Medical students were educationally ill prepared to undertake suchintensive academic learning. Compared with eighty percent of theologystudents and sixty-five percent of law students, only twenty-six percent ofmedical students were then college graduates.26 A study of medical educa-tion found that even the “more firmly established institutions includingthe Jefferson Medical College [supposedly attended by Maus], Universityof Pennsylvania College of Medicine, the College of Physicians and Sur-geons of Columbia University, University of the City of New York MedicalDepartment, and Harvard University’s Medical Department fell below thepeaks of scientific advance.”27

Lincoln could secure additional evidence from an 1846 book onpractical education in medicine. Not surprisingly, Dr. John Watson de-rided the “half-educated graduates in medicine” who practiced the “rifestand rankest quackery.”28

Even an 1851 report by the AMA Committee on Medical Educa-tion agreed and lamented the public’s deprecation of the education of


physicians: “More pains are often taken by men of reputed good sense inchoosing a cook or a coachman than in choosing a physician.”29 Of course,Jones as a “man of reputed good sense” was guilty of doing exactly whatthe AMA stated.

JUDGE DAVID DAVIS PRESIDES

On September 9, Tazewell County Circuit Court convened in Pe-kin and Lincoln and Parker filed a technical motion in the Jones v. Mauscase. They moved that the damages demanded in the declaration be madeto conform to the writ.30 During the September 1851 term of the TazewellCounty Circuit Court, Judge David Davis (Figure 5) presided when Jones v.Maus was scheduled to be heard. Davis’ most prominent feature was hisgirth. He was short, portly to an extreme and weighed more than threehundred pounds. However, he was a perfectionist who was impeccable inhis choice of clothing and in his attention to cleanliness. Davis presenteda perfectly groomed and appropriate judicial picture. By contrast, in Lin-coln’s early years at the bar, he was nondescript and dressed carelessly.His “attire and physical habits were on a plane with those of an ordinaryfarmer. His hat was innocent of a nap. His boots had no acquaintance withblacking. His clothes had not been introduced to the whiskbroom.”31

After graduating Kenyon College in Ohio, Davis attended the NewHaven Law School in Connecticut for one year. In 1836, Davis moved toBloomington, Illinois and two years later he married the daughter of ajudge. Davis was elected the judge of the Eighth Judicial District in 1848.He and Lincoln had a very cordial relationship. When Davis was unexpect-edly called away, Lincoln substituted for the judge.31

LINCOLN AS A LAWYER

Lincoln developed a reputation as a “rainmaker” as he eagerlysought, and found, new business for his law firm. Consequently, Lincolnwas almost entirely a litigation man with negligible office practice. Hispleas were thoroughly adequate and were followed by briefs that simplyand concisely concentrated on the simplification of the case to one or twopoints. Given the time constraints of being a lawyer on the circuit, Lincolnconstantly demonstrated his precise skill in interviewing to collect data.He was extremely effective in the direct and cross-examination of wit-nesses. Lincoln had a major talent in speaking to the jury and in putting


FIGURE 5Judge David Davis was a life-long associate of Abraham Lincoln as a circuitcourt judge, as a Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court and as administrator

of Lincoln’s estate (National Archives, Library of Congress).


the entire case into focus in an appealing manner.33 A colleague recalledLincoln’s individuality: “Mr. Lincoln was the plainest man I ever heard.He was not a speaker, but a talker. He talks to jurors and to political gath-erings plain, sensible, candid talk, almost as in conversation, no effortwhatever in oratory. But his talking had wonderful effect. Honesty, can-dor, fairness, everything that was convincing, was in his manner and ex-pressions.”34

Lincoln’s third and last law partner, William H. Herndon, pre-sented a sharp physical and mental contrast with the senior partner. Hern-don affected a special finery in his dress. At times, he wore shiny blackpatent leather shoes, gloves of smooth kid goatskin, and a tall black stove-pipe silk hat. In appearance, Herndon was seven inches shorter than Lin-coln with jet-black hair and a dark-skinned complexion. Bony and lean,Herndon always stood upright. His face was dominated by piercing darkeyes glaring out from cup-like rings. Nervous energy abounded through-out his body and he moved and walked quickly. A rapid thinker, writerand speaker, Herndon reached conclusions swiftly. He was quick-tem-pered, rash and unpredictable with a pronounced and well-cultivated fond-ness for liquor. Frequently, Herndon indulged in drinking sprees andsometimes ended up drunk. As he compiled pertinent legal informationand prepared documents for court, Herndon’s literary style was verboseand pompous. Although Herndon “was an excellent student and becamean able attorney, he seems never to have liked the law.”35

Herndon did the “drudge” work, handled the office and attendedcases in Springfield and the immediate surrounding areas. Undoubtedly,Herndon would have sought out precedent cases for the Jones v. Maus trial.Charles S. Zane, a law student at Lincoln & Herndon, commented on theirlegal style:36

I also heard them examine witnesses and argue questions of law and factin court . . . Mr. Lincoln, as a reasoner, was careful as to his premisesand drew his inferences cautiously and with great clearness . . . [He] con-sidered them [questions] more in the concrete. [Lincoln] had great ca-pacity for analysis and generalization. He was adept in drawing reason-able inferences. As a rule they both did not engage in the trial of thesame case . . . Mr. Lincoln was more methodical and systematic.

As the junior partner, Herndon repeatedly said that Lincoln didnot confide in him. He found Lincoln to be the “most reticent & mostlysecretive man that ever existed.”34 However, the partners adhered strictly


to an equal sharing of their fees. Regardless of who appeared in court,Lincoln and Herndon shared the fees equally. Jones v Maus was just sucha situation.

LAWYERS AS PEACEMAKERS

Lincoln probably realized the futility of arguments at a trial in thisassault case. Legal evidence was sparse and likely eye-witnesses were miss-ing. Most likely, Lincoln urged both Jones and Maus to settle the problemout of court. In his notes for a law lecture, Lincoln described the role ofthe lawyer as an honest peacemaker37

Discourage litigation. Persuade your neighbors to compromise wheneveryou can. Point out to them how the nominal winner is often a realloser—in fees, expenses, and waste of time. As a peacemaker the lawyerhas a superior opportunity of being a good man. There will still be busi-ness enough.Never stir up litigation. A worse man can scarcely be found than one whodoes this. Who can be more nearly a fiend than he who habitually over-hauls the Register of deeds, in search of defects in titles, whereupon tostir up strife, and put money in his pocket? A moral tone ought to beinfused into the profession, which should drive such men out of it.There is a vague popular belief that lawyers are necessarily dishonest. I sayvague, because when we consider to what extent confidence, and honorsare reposed in, and conferred upon lawyers by the people, it appearsimprobable that the impression of dishonesty is very distinct and vivid.Yet the impression is common—almost universal. Let no young man,choosing the law for a calling, for a moment yield to this popular belief.Resolve to be honest at all events; and if, in your own judgement, youcannot be an honest lawyer, resolve to be honest without being a lawyer.Choose some other occupation, rather than one in the choosing of whichyou do, in advance, consent to be a knave.

Peacemaking was not unusual among principled honest lawyers inthe nineteenth century. In referring to lawyers who swindled their clients,Lincoln was adamant: “I never want the reputation enjoyed by those shin-ing lights of the profession Catch’em & Cheat’em.”38 In 1845, the New YorkLegal Observer declared that “the respectable attorney . . . is almost alwaysa peace-maker and a settler of disputes, without litigation, where it is prac-ticable.”39 Despite these lofty legal tenets urging compromise, trials duringLincoln’s years as a practicing attorney clearly demonstrated a litigiousdisposition in the community. That ready disposition to sue continues tothe present day.


When the Jones v. Maus case was called to trial, Lincoln informedJudge Davis that both parties had reached an agreement and the courtdismissed the case. There is no record of exactly how Jones and Mauscame to an agreement. Court costs for Jones totaled $1.85 and Maus paid$1.35 to cover court costs.

WAS MAUS A PHYSICIAN?

As to Maus’ being a physician, the 1850 federal census of TazewellCounty does list two physicians named Maus in the city of Pekin. Bothwere born in Pennsylvania with Joseph being forty years old and WilliamS being forty-three.40 However, census information is provided by the indi-vidual and is not checked for accuracy. Lincoln was probably correct tobelieve his client’s statement that Maus was not a physician who graduatedfrom Jefferson Medical College. If Maus did graduate from the JeffersonMedical College, he probably did so in the 1830s. A perusal of the list of4,018 graduates of the Jefferson Medical College beginning with the firstgraduating class in 1826 and going to 1858 did not reveal a single personwith the surname of Maus; definitely neither a Joseph S. or a William S.Maus!41

LINCOLN’S CLIENT BECOMES HIS ADVERSARY

Almost immediately after the Jones v. Maus case, Lincoln encoun-tered his former client, Jones, as a legal adversary. Coincidentally, Lincolnalso settled this case out of court. During the same September 1851 termof the Tazewell County Circuit Court. Lincoln & Herndon defendedMilden Kitchell and his wife Elizabeth against a charge of Trespass on thecase for slandering Mary Ann Jacobus. Edward Jones represented Jacobusand Judge Davis presided. In her sworn affidavit, Jacobus claimed thatElizabeth “graphically, falsely and maliciously, without any cause of justifi-cation . . . reputed that offiant [Jacobus] was a whore, that she got her liv-ing by whoring and that she and her sisters got their bonnets and fineclothing by whoring.” On the same day that Parker filed Jones’ complaintagainst Maus, September 1, 1851, Jones filed Jacobus’ declaration againstthe Kitchells. Jones repeated the specific charges involved in the slanderof Jacobus. “On October 1, 1850, [defendants] falsely, maliciously andwickedly did speak and publish . . . the following scandalous words to wit—Mary Ann Jacobus is a whore. Mary Ann Jacobus gets her bonnets and


fine clothes by whoring . . . and [she and her sisters] dishonestly and un-chastely sell their bodies to and commit fornication with men.” Damagesin the sum of four thousand dollars were requested. In entering a pleaand demurrer, Lincoln repeated the slander and said that “Elizabeth is notguilty of the speaking of said words in manner and form” and the evidence“is not sufficient in law” for the plaintiff’s charges. He pleaded actio nonthat the plaintiff ought not to have or maintain her aforesaid actionagainst the defendants. In an affidavit prepared by Jones, Jacobus sworethat Milden Kitchell had valuable property and “will either leave the stateor place his property out of his hands” to avoid her recovering anythingin her suit. She requested that the Kitchells “be compelled to give specialbail.” Each of the defendants posted their individual surety bonds. Jonessubpoenaed twelve male witness to testify for Jacobus. In view of the over-whelming witnesses for Jacobus, Lincoln persuaded his clients to makeopen denials in the Tazewell County Circuit Court that “they or either ofthem ever made any charge against the chastity of the plaintiff . . . neitherof them has ever had any knowledge, information, or reasonable belief, ofany want of chastity on the part of the plaintiff.” Both parties reached anagreement with the Kitchells agreeing not to make any allegations aboutJacobus’ chastity. This public affirmation of Jacobus’ good reputation re-paired her standing in the community and settled the case. With the con-sent of both parties, Davis dismissed the case and sought court costs fromthe plaintiff. Surprisingly, Milden Kitchell came to the support of Jacobus.He swore that he knew Jacobus “for a considerable length of time and hasnot known of her having any property whatever beyond her wearing ap-parel . . . said plaintiff is wholly unable to pay the costs in this suit.42

LINCOLN’S FURTHER LEGAL ENCOUNTERS WITH MEDICINE

This bombastic problem of medical education, medical practices,and the antagonistic hostility between regular and irregular physiciansarose a number of times during Lincoln’s almost twenty-five year long lawpractice. Four years after Jones v. Maus, Lincoln helped prepare a speciallegislative charter for a proposed homeopathic medical college to be lo-cated in Chicago.43,44 Six years later in a medical malpractice case, he cross-examined a parade of physicians of all persuasions who were willing tocastigate the therapeutic regimens of their regularly trained colleagues.45

In an 1857 murder trial, Lincoln cross-examined the defense’s expert med-ical witnesses who testified that an overdose of chloroform caused insan-ity.46 Two years later, in 1859, Lincoln presented legal citations to support


his contention that a single medical witness is not sufficient to establishwhat is usual and customary payment for medical services rendered.47 Evenduring his presidency, Lincoln considered a pardon for a convicted mur-derer and selected a medical expert to determine the condemned man’ssanity or insanity.48 In all of these examples, Lincoln was keenly aware ofthe differences in medical education, the biases in everyday medical prac-tice and in the contradictory testimony engendered by the animosity be-tween orthodox and irregular doctors.

REFERENCES

1. Tazewell County Circuit Court [Pekin]. Affidavit of Edward J. Jones filed July 24, 1851.2. Tazewell County Circuit Court. Appearance bond filed, July 24, 1851.3. Tazewell County Circuit Court. Plaintiff’s affidavit filed, July 24, 1851.4. Tazewell County Circuit Court. Trespass Vi Et Armis, Declaration by Edward J. Jones filed, Septem-

ber 1, 1851.5. Tazewell County Circuit Court. Plea of Joseph S. Maus filed, September 23, 1851.6. Challiss WL. Collection of Lecture Admission Cards and Related Material from Jefferson Medical College,

1847–1848 College of Physicians of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.7. Wilder A. History of Medicine. A Brief Outline of Medical History and Sects of Physicians, from the

Earliest Historic Period With an Extended Account of the New Schools of the Healing Art in the NineteenthCentury, and Especially a History of the American Eclectic Practice of Medicine, Never Before PublishedNew Sharon, ME: New England Eclectic Publishing Co., 1901, 571, 580–584, 666, 670.

8. Wagner, Jr .FB. Tradition and Heritage: Thomas Jefferson University Philadelphia, PA: Lea & Febiger,1989.

9. Gross SD. Report of the Committee on Medical Education. Transactions of the American MedicalAssociation 1867; 18:363–368.

10. Transactions of the American Medical Assn. Vol 2. 1849; 288–289.11. Fishbein M. A History of the American Medical Association 1847–1947 Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders

Co., 1947, 3–16.12. Numbers RL. Do-it-yourself the sectarian way in Send Me a Lady Doctor edited by R. Abram, New

York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1985, 43–54.13. Abram R. Send Me a Lady Doctor New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1985, 17.14. Gevitz N. Other Healers. Unorthodox Medicine in America Baltimore, MD, Johns Hopkins University

Press, 1988.15. Pollak K, Underwood EA. The Healers. The Doctor, Then and Now London, Thomas Nelson and

Sons, Ltd., 1968, 194.16. Waite FC. American sectarian medical colleges before the Civil War. Bulletin of the History of

Medicine 1946; 19:148–166.17. Warner JA. Medical sectarianism, therapeutic conflict and the shaping of orthodox professional

identity in antebellum American medicine in Medical Fringe and Medical Orthodoxy 1750–1850edited by WF Bynum and R Porter. London, Croom Helm, 1987, 234–260.

18. Coffin AI. A Botanic Guide to Health. Fifth Edition Manchester, The Author, 1846, 70.19. Shryock RH. Sylvester Graham and the popular health movement. Mississippi Valley History Review

1931; 18:172–183.20. Haller, Jr. JS. The People’s Doctors: Samuel Thomson and the American Botanic Movement, 1790–1860

Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2000.21. Burrow JG. American Medical Association. Voice of Medicine Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Univer-

sity Press, 1963, 3, 10–11.22. Trall RT. The Hygienic System Battle Creek, MI: 1872, 13–14.23. Spiegel AD. Mary Edwards Walker, MD: The only woman ever awarded the Congressional Medal

of Honor. New York State Journal of Medicine 1991; 91: 297–304.


24. Apple RD. Women, Health and Medicine in America New York: Garland Pub. Co., 1990, 293, 304.25. Davis NS. On medical education. New York Medical Journal 1845; 5:415,418.26. Kaufman M. American Medical Education. The Formative Years 1765–1910 Westport, CT: Green-

wood Press, 1976, 51, 88,101,104.27. Norwood WF. Medical Education in the United States Before the Civil War Philadelphia: University

of Pennsylvania Press, 1944, 416–421.28. Watson J. A Lecture on Practical Education in Medicine and On the Courses of Instruction at the New

York Hospital New York: J & H.G. Langley, 1846.29. Hooker W [Chairman]. Report of the AMA Committee on Medical Education. Transactions of the

AMA 1851; 4:409–441.30. Miers ES, Barringer WE, Powell CP. Lincoln Day-by-Day. A Chronology 1809–1865 Washington,

DC: Lincoln Sesquicentennial Commission, 1960, 2:40, 59, 60, 83, 114, 118, 199, 326.31. Cooper JH. Abraham Lincoln wasn’t a yuppie. National Law Journal 1987; February 23, 13.32. Biographical Record of McLean Country, Illinois. Chicago: S.J. Clarke & Co., 1899, 9–17.33. Frank JP. Lincoln As a Lawyer Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1961, 168–173.34. Shestack JJ. Resolve to be honest at all events. Connecticut Law Tribune March 21, 1994.35. Newton JF. Lincoln and Herndon Cedar Rapids, IA: Torch Press, 1910, 18, 251.36. Tilton CC. Lincoln and Lamon. Partners and friends. Transactions of the Illinois Historical Society

1931; 38:175–228.37. Basler RP. The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press,

1953, 1:267, 270, 285; 2:17, 69, 81, 114.38. Randall RP. With malice toward none . . . (except Lincoln’s wife). Saturday Review 1954; 37:11–12,

50–51.39. New York Legal Observer. Examination of students, 1845; 3:395–396.40. U.S. Department of the Interior, Seventh Federal Census. Bloomington-Normal Genealogical

Society, 180, 184.41. Gayley JF. A History of the Jefferson Medical School of Philadelphia with Biographical Sketches of the

Early Professors Philadelphia: Joseph H. Wilson, 1858, 49–59.42. Tazewell County Circuit Court. Jacobus v. Kitchell et ux. Declaration filed, September term, 1851.43. Laws of State of Illinois Passed by the 19st General Assembly Convened January 1, 1855. Spring-

field: Lanphier & Walker, 1855.44. Duff JJ. A. Lincoln, Prairie Lawyer New York: Rinehart & Co., 1960, 251.45. Spiegel AD, Kavaler F. Chicken bones, defense lawyer A. Lincoln and a malpractice case. Lincoln

Herald 1997; 99: 156–170.46. Spiegel AD, Kavaler F. Abraham Lincoln, medical jurisprudence, and chloroform induced insan-

ity in an 1857 murder trial. Caduceus 1994; 10:145–160.47. Illinois Supreme Court. Bissell v. Ryan, Suit for debt in January term, 1860, 23 Ill 521.48. Spiegel AD. Abraham Lincoln and the insanity plea. Journal of Community Health 1994; 19:201–

220.

Documents

History: Abraham Lincoln's Suit Against a Medical Imposter Who Assaulted His Client