A thank-you note by Peter Weidmann to the Magistrate of the Free Royal City of Sombor
|Title||A thank-you note by Peter Weidmann to the Magistrate of the Free Royal City of Sombor|
|Subject||Peter Weidmann, The Magistrate of the Free Royal City of Sombor, Thank-You Note, Land Authentification|
|Description||Thank-You Note by Peter Weidmann, expressing gratitude towards the Magistrate of the Free Royal City of Sombor for the letter regarding the land autentification granted to Weidmann.|
|Publisher||Historical archive Sombor|
|Contributor||Peter Weidmann, The Magistrate of the Free Royal City of Sombor|
|Date||June 22nd, 1802|
|Type||Text; Thank-You Note|
|Coverage||Free Royal City of Sombor, June 1802|
|Rights||This material has been digitized to expand access while protecting the materials from degradation through physical handling. Access to the digitized material will be granted to all interested parties. The physical copy of the document is available at the Historical Archive Sombor. In the case of citation or use, please state the origin of the material (Istorijski arhiv Sombor / Historical Archives Sombor).|
|Infrascripti posteaquam virtute determinationis magistratualis ad no Prot. Polit.1 Interventa pro investigandis nonnulis machinationibus et prevaricationibus per Dominum chyrurgum Isaacum Kretzmer teneatis ex parte aliqua etiam in effectum deductis secus vero in gravem contribuentium enervationem tendentibus excuisi exstitissemus; prehabita mutua cum Deputatione ex parte Generalis Universitatis Comitatus hujus Bacsinensis eadem in objecto exmissa Cointelligentia talem qualis investigationem cumque eadem mox praterlapsa Generali congregatione ex parte Deputationis relata exstitisset, et una in pertractationem venisset, ad edocendum hac quoque in parte Amplissimum Magistratum Determinationem G. Universitatis hicce sub adcopulatam referimus et super omnium serie presentem prestamus relationem; eo adjecta, e re esse, ut effectus ordinum circa inserendas per respectivos prescribentes medicos et chyrurgos taxas medicamentorum procuretur eatenusque Congrua disponantur. Sigilatum Zomborini die 8 Februari 1825.
Mathias Jozits senator et Capitaneus qua magistratualiter commissionatus
Stephanus Estergany Senator aeque comisionatus
Joannes Lipay ordinatur notarius ……. Qua aeque magistratualiter commisionatus
Anno 1825 die 19a Januarii in Libera Regiaque Civitate Zomboriensi comitatui Bacsiensi in gremiata infrascripti pro investigandis et eruendis nonnullis prevaricationibus er machinationibus per gremialem Judaum Chirurgum Isacum Kretzmer uti Per D. Senatorem una sur: capitaneum Mathiam Jozits A. Magistratui relatum exstitit, attcutatis et partim in perniciens Partim ennervationem contribuentis populi Sub curam suam chyrurgicam suscepti, partim etiam offensionem crediti Pharmacopaorum publicorum, tamquam pro conservanda valetudine in…..ncipe necessariarum parte ab una ex parte SS Et ordinum comitatus Hujus Bacsiensis, parte ab altera Magistratus Zomboriensis exempti Servata in concursu individuorum sanitaris misata deputatione sequentem peregimus investigationem et qudem preprimis exhibita est nobis per D. Pharmacopolam gremialem Alexandrum Peak hic sub no 1o species facti specificos partim perpetratanum prevaricationum et machinationum casus continens una cum denotatione testium ad quemlibet casum applicando dein presectata sunt complures prescriptiones chyrurgica medicamentorum diversis inprimis sub cura sua constitutis per antelatum chyrurgum Kretzmer facta et partim ad Pharmacopoam Peahianam, partim Tunnerianam directa cum specifica taxarum pro iisdem medicamentis soluta quorum in consequentiam prescriptionibus chyrurgicis pro combinatione ulteriori individuo sanitatis aeque ad hanc comissionem exempto Consignatis iisque facta combinatione uti hic sub no 2. Advolvitur reflexionem suam scripto presentante circa reliqua puncta prevaricationum et attentatarum in adversationum inspecie vero casum illum ubi antelatus Kretzmer gremialem Pharmacopolam D. Alexandrum Peak ad desumpsionem excessivarum taxarum et pressiorum ultra competentiam desumptarum summarum analitiose inducere studuerat, auditi sint juxta exibita deutri puncta Domini chyrurgus Civitatis Zombor Josephus Molnar, Ivanes Kulentsits Diplomaticus pharmacopous et protocolista Civitatis Zombor Adalbertus Hanke, qui fassiones suas hic sub numeris 3. 4. Et 5 advolutas scripto exhibuerunt saepefato Domino Alexandro Peak pro majori casus ejusdem clarificatione suam quoque deductionem hic sub no 6 adcopulatam presentante. Investigatione relate ad predeclaratum casum taliter peracta assumpsimus circumstantiam illam qua mediante pretenditur eumdem chyrurgum Isacum Kretzmer pravas suas machinationes circa excessivas taxarum desumptiones et prescriptionum per se factarum suppresiones, partim transformationes in effectum deductisse quo sine ruditus est previe deporito corporali Juramento Josephus Gutyan annorum 27 uxoratus RCatholicus magister arculanius neo casalis confesioris Neo Szivatz qui ad hicce su no 7 adnexat deutri puncta sequentia fasus est, et quidem ad primum
Ad 1um Quod gremialem non ita pridem ad gremium Civitatis immigrantem chyrurgum Judaum Isacum Kretzmer bene noscat tum prolem suam infirmam aliquo tempore curaverit.
Ad 2dum Fatens de hoc Chyrgo nihil sciverat verum dum prolem suam infirmam Zomborinum adtulisset filius Judai Zomboriensis Salamonis Veisz dexteritatem antelati chyrurgi Kretzmer extollens fatenti et uxori eum commendaverit et effective etiam ad eum deduxit.
Ad 3ium Dum antelatus chyrurgus visa prolitam curandam suscepiset et medicamenta prescripsisset mox fatentis uxori suasit ut eadem medicamenta ex antiquiori apotheca videlicet Francisco Tunneriana sibi procuret affidans eandem quod et melioris qualitatis medicamenta et multo leviori pretio talia obtentura sit.
Ad 4um Fatentis uxor taliter affidata abinde etiam continuo medicamenta sibi procuravit et quidem cum quotidie novas prescriptiones fecisset idem chyrurgus, ideo quotidie adlata sunt, consistebant autem eadem medicamenta in quopiam spirituoso binimento et pulveribus qui una cum binimento licet omni die nova prescriptio intervenisset tamen ejusdem speciei et qualitatis fuerant.
Ad 5um Cum antelato chyrurgus occasione cujuslibet prescriptionis taxam medicamentorum cum duobus florenis determinaverit et ultra hos nihil plus in Pharmacopoa exactum fuerit, id in eadem nihil taxatum fuit, prescriptiones autem non sunt restituta.
Ad 6um Tam fatans, quam et illius uxor metuentes ne pretium medicamentorum jam solutum, denuo solvere debeant, prescriptiorum per saepefatam chyrurgum Kretzmer ad rationem infirme prolis sua factarum restitutionem apud D. Pharmacopolam Tunner sapius ursit verum ex quinque prescriptionibus nonnisi unam a coadjutore Drieszbenger Pharamacopola obtinuit, ipso Domino Tumer ratione residuarum prescriptiorum id declarante, quod unam ipse chyrurgus Kretzmer recepiset, in locum primera ad apothecam data novam que hic sub no 8 adnectitam, substituit.
Ad 7am Quem admodum fatens precedenti puncto fasus est, priorem sub no octavo a chyrurgo receptam, et aliam a Pharmacopoi coadjutore Drieszberger obtentam, et hic sub no 9 adcopulatam et dat. 11a octobris 1824 expeditam: de reliquo prius factas prescriptiones Kretzmerianas pro deperditis infirmatas non recepit, verum posterius factas, cum affidatione quod leviori pretio obtenturus sit medicamenta per ejusdem Kretzmer prescriptiones sicut persolvit, ita etiam easdem recepit.
Ad 8um Recordatus omnino fatens casum, quas quovis occasione pro prestitis medicamentis in aphoteca Tunneriana prestitit, solutionum: unam pro medicamentis prima vice ex apotheca erga prescriptionem Kretzmerianam, quam tamen nunquam obtinuit, acceptis solvit 1f 30x Secunda vice pro prescripto spirituoso binimento et 8 portionibus pulverum solvit 1f. con. moneta pro medicamentis in prescriptione sub no 9 contentis solvit istidem 2 florenos w.w. pro medicamentia 4a et 5a vice erga prescriptiones pariter nunquam restitutas acceptis, solvit fatens quavis occasione 2 florenos w.w pro iisdem autem medicamentis tardius ex apotheca Peakiana acceptis fatens solvit 50xros w.w.
ad 9um medicamenta sub no 9 contenta fatens semet dumtaxat ex apotheca Tunneriana adferri curavit et pro illis solvit 2 florenos w.w. de reliquo qualiter et per quem taxa in eodem recipe advolata, deleta et alterata fuerit, fatenti non constat.
Ad 10um Prescriptio hac est illa cujus declaratis puncto 7o ocurit; sed medicamenta in eadem specificata fatens nunquam accepit cum hanc prescriptionem nunquam in apothecam detulerit verum aliam in locum cujus hac dein erga requisitionem fatentis per saepefatum chyrurgum Kretzmer restituta fuit.
Ad 11um Reliquo hic sub B. no 1,2,3,4 et C. no 1,2 productas prescriptiones fatens ad Peakianam apothecam derivavit et abinde etiam medicamenta obtinuit, prescriptionesque iis exolutis recepit.
Ad 12um Fatens causam primum derivationis prescriptiorum Kretzmerianorum illam asignat quod prolis illius in domo Ambrosii Fuchs gremialis e regione Curie Civica posita infirma jacuerint et stante pro tunc majori luto adlatio medicamentorum ex apotheca Tumeriana velut magis dissita, nimis incommoda fuerit, alia causa fuit, quod pro medicamentis illis pro quibus apud D. Tumer 2 fl. w.w. solverat in Peahiana apotheca nonnisi 5oxros w.w. solverit sed et meliorem effectum medicamenta Peahiana apud infirmum produxerit.
Ad 13um Fatens apothecam Peahianam ideo pluribus vicibus desertis, quia chyrurgus Kretzmer eidem intendirit declarando, quod is in disharmonia cum domino Peak vivat, proinde non sit bona medicamenta suppeditaturus, unaque fatentam affidavit , quod medicamenta leviori pretio apud D. Tumer obtenturis sit.
Ad 14um Prescriptiones Kretzmeriana puncto 11 citate ut B no 1,2,3,4. ad mutum remonstrabunt.
Ad 15um Prolis infirma est unius anni et trium mensium dixerat autem prolem eandem laborare infirmitate auglica rectius Rachitis dicta addendo fatentam fortunatum esse, quod in illum impegerius cum secus nemo alter prolem curare scivisset; interim prolis hodie cum eadem infirmitate laborat.
Ad 16um Fatens nullas vituperationes adversus personam et pharmaciam domini Alexandri Beah ad eodem chyrurgo Kretzmer audivit , sed tamen apothecam Tunnerianam Peakiane pretulit et magis commendavit.
Ad 17um Verum est, quod idem chyrurgus Kretzmer coram ipso fatente dixerit se cum domino Alexandro Peak disconvenisse, et nisi idem dominus Peak votis ipssius paruerit se apothecam illius occluserit.
Audita item est Catharina nata Partl suprafati Josephi Gutyan arcularii magistri Neo Szivatziensis uxor annorum 23 R.Cath que deposita previe corporali juramento precedenti in ordine testi, marito suo per omnia conformiter fassa est; dempto puncto 17o ad quod se nihil audivisse, nec proinde scire fassa est.
Testibus previis juxta preadvoluta sub no 7. puncta auditis examinata est juxta hic sub no 10 adnexa nova puncta Josepha Ambrosii Fuchs civis et pistonis gremialis filia, annuorum circiter 16, R.cath. in capitis constituta, que deposito previe corporali juramento, ad pro advoluta deutri punctra sequentia fassa est: et qudem
Ad 1um Quod chyrurgum Judaum Isacum Kretzmer exinde bene noscat, cum arcularii Neo Szivatzensis Josephi Gutyan proluem in domo fatentis egrotantem aliquo tempore in cura habuerit, hocque fuit ad domum fatentis quotidie venerit.
As 2um Quotiestunque antelatus chyrurgus Kretzmer medicamenta pro prefata infirma proli prescripsit, semper illam disertam dedit inviationem ut eadem medicamenta ex antiqua seu Tunneriana apotheca adferantur, licet respectu distantius quam pertransire debuit, apotheca Peakiana tamquam domui fatentis immediate contigna magis commoda fuisset.
Ad 3um, 4um et 5um fatens nihil scit.
Petrus Czvetkovits inhabitator et imigrator magister Zomboriensis annorum 23, uxoratus g.n.u ritus, deposito corporali juramento, ad hicce sub no11 advolita deutri puncta sequentia fassus est:
Ad 1um quod chyrurgum Judaum Isacum Kretzmer partim exinde, quod in gremio civitatis Zomboriensis habitaverat et curam aegronum presusceperit, partim vero quod matrem suam curare inceperit, bene noscat.
Ad 2um fatens eo tempore quo mater ejus Hydrope laborabat non vocavit, verum vicina Judea Moysis Hecht uxor corsum comparens eundem chyrurgum commendavit, ac una etiam ad aegram fatentis matrem vocavit.
Ad3um A fatente quidem idem chyrurgus Kretzmer centum florenos pro cura matris numquam petiit, sed fatens ipse a domesticis suis audivit quod is in casu si eandem fatentis matrem Hydrope laborantem pristina valetudini resituerit, 50 florenos petierit. Ceterum id verum est, quod pro prescriptione et visita eidem fatens 5 florenos solverit.
Ad 4um nihil.
Ad 5um Fatens persoluto pretio medicamentorum ex apotheca Tunneriana acceptorum prescriptionum chyrurgicam vulgo recipe dictam mox obtinuit.
Ad 6um Puncto 3ia clarificavit fatens.
Testis Petrus Pavlovits sodalis mercantilis annorum 23. ….. g.n.u.k. Magno Betskerekino oriundus, apud civem et mercatorem Zomboriensem Petrum Veszelinovits in servitio constitutus deposito corporali juramento ad deutri puncto hic sub no 12 advoluta sequentia fasus est et quidem
Ad 1um Quod sepefatum chyrurgum Isacum Kretzmer bene noscat cum in statu valetudinaris constitutus sub cura ejusdem chyrurgi fuerit.
Ad 2dum Fatens dum semet infirmum sensisset, ipse antelatum chyrurgum adivit et opem medicam petiit.
Ad 3um Dum idem chyrurgus medicamenta pro parte fatentis prescripsisset, illud diserte declaravit, quod is non admittat ut ad prescriptiones illius medicamenta ex apotheca Peahiana accipitantur, cum dominus Pharamacopola Alexander Peak inimicus illius esset; et ideo fatens esto quidem apotheca Beahiana ad fatentis quarterium multo proprior esset, attamen coactus fuit medicamenta ex Tunneriana accipere.
Ad 4um Preter ea, qua priori puncto attacta sunt, de reliquo fatens nihil audivit.
Testis D. Fridericus Schmidt, diplom. Pharmacopeus annorum 24, ..... R.cath deposito previe corporali juramento ad hicce readvoluta sub no 13 deutri puncta sequentia fassus est:
Ad 1um Quod chyrurgum Judaum Isaacum Kretzmer non ita pridem ad gremium Civitatis immigrantam noscat, cum sepius etiam cum ipso constitutus fuerit.
Ad 2dum Quod idem chyrurgus sepius coram ipso fatente initio D. Franciscum Tunner, dein autem contra dominum Alexandrum Peak diversimode debachatus fuerit, et ideo ipsum pro mali characteris viro servet presertim cum ex prescriptionibus illius per fatentem inspectis diversa perversat machinationes appareant, qua cum honesti viri charactere et indole minus conveniunt.
Testis Salamon Veisz Judaus Zomboriensis annorum 54, uxoratus deposito juxta proprium suum ritum in synagoga solita juramento ad deutri puncta hic sub no 14 advoluta sequentia fassus est:
Ad 1um Quod chyrurgum Judaum Isaacum Kretzmer qua hic loci degentem noscat.
Ad 2dum fatens jure ex respectu illo, quod idem chyrurgus Kretzmer uxorem suam in gravi infirmitate constitutam ex eadem salvererit, cum apud D. Aurulem Basilium Athanatzkovits, ejusque fratruelem A.R.D. Paulum Athanatzkovits parochium g.n.u.k. gremialem presentavit, comendavit et laudavit, quin eatenus alium aliquem respectum habuisset.
Ad 3um et 4um nihil.
Ad 5um Verum est, quod fatens contra eundem Judaum chyrurgum majorem in modum debracchatus fuerit, idque ideo fecit, cum uxorem ejus in gravi infirmitate constitutam curandam susceperit, et post aliquot tempus repentine citra sufficientem causam deseruerit.
Ad 6um Fatens filium suum eidem chyrurgo Kretzmer ad pecuniam pro servitiis ea ratione reliquit ut eumdem in arte chyrurgica instruat, de reliquo autem nullam aliam conventionem habuit.
Ad 7um Cum interim fatens observasset, quod filius ipsius in eadem atre per prefatum chyrurgum debite minus instruatur et erudiatur, eumdem ab eodem recepit.
Super quibus sua serie et ordine per nos pertractatis et legali modo erutis adherentis presentem in consequentiam eatenus interventarum confessiorum prestamus relationem. Sigilatum Zombor ut supra.
sledi niz necitkih potpisa
Mathias Jozits senator et Capitaneus qua magistratualiter commissionatus
Stephanus Estergany Senator aeque comissionatus
Joannes Lipay ordinatus notarius ……. Qua aeque magistratualiter commissionatus
In merito nonnullarum prevaricationum per D. Chyrurgum Isaacum Kretzmer cum enervtione contribuentium attenratarum.
Deutri Puncta pro Judao Salamone Veisz contra Judaum chyrurgum Isaacum Kretzmer directa.
1. Utrum fatens noscat Judaum chyrurgum Isaacum Kretzmer et unde?
2. Fatens cum Judao chyrurgo Kretzmer de domo in domum eumdem chirurgum ubique, qua per suam matrem missum neo advenam et peritissimum medicum Recomendavit veritatem fatens hic quoque depromat et qualem scopumcum tali exaltratione ejus assegni voluit?
3. Delatus est chirurgus Kreczmer de variis suis erga contribuentes in prescriptionibus medicamentorum practicatis imosteris fatens cum eo in nexu fuit expressiones a contribuentibus inter se dividendi, fateatur fatens ad conscicutiam et sub jurata fide in quantum se extendit nexus ejus cum chirurgo Kreczmer?
4. Magister imigrator Petrus Czvetkovits exponit quid chirurgus Kreczmer a sua in Hydrope Cubante matre per una visita 5fun w pretenderis, cui multum visum fuit, accepit tandem chirurgus duos florenos w eo id declarante quod residuos 3 florenos filius Salamonis Veisz pro suis fidelibus servitiis retinere voluerit. Fatentis ergo filius suis aeque in nexu cum chirurgo Kreczmer in ruinam miserarum contribuentiam destinatus quomodo in quali forma et nexu circumstantia fuerit? Fatens exponat.
5. Fatens chirurgum Krezmer coram pluribus quo maximo impostore et maleversante declaravit in quo cardine imposturas et maleversationes ejus consistans? Fatens fideliter exponat.
6. Filius fatentis fuit qua servitor apud Judaum chirurgum Kreczmer habuitur filius pro servitis suo certam solutionem et quantum aut e divisione extorsionum servitia soluta ….? Fatens fideliter depromat.
7. Est ne filius fatentis actu in servitio apud chirurgum Kreczmer vel non? Siqudem solutio servitii via extorsionis per detectas imposturas sublata esset , deregat fatens.
Deutri puncta pro diplomatico pharmacopoe domino Friderico Schmidt contra Judaum chirurgum Isaacum Kreczmer directa
1. Utrum fatens noscat Judaum chirurgum Kreczmer et unde?
2. Scitum et aliquam notitiam habet ne fatens quod chirurgus Kreczmer contra personam et apothecam domini pharmacopoei Alexandri Peak et contra personam diplomatici sui coadjutoris Ivannis Kuluntsits calumniose, de tractorio scandalose debachatus, quibusque expressionibus usus fuerit?
Tanta jam antiquis temporibus exstitit sanitatis estimatio, ut eam Thesauris omnibus priorem, suavissimum vita condimentum et alteram terena felicitatis partem ac plane humana beatitudinis apicem existimarint; Imo aput Ethnicos divinis prosequendam honoribus censuerint. Hinc nec mirandum quod moderno cultiore aevo ad evitandos tot offendenda sanitatis scopulos, et manutenendum preciosi illius Thesauri vigorem tanta tam ipsos medicos ac chyrurgos, quam etiam pharamacopoeos respicientia, reiteratis vicibus emanaverint Benigno gratiosa Intimata. Quam procul a recto hocce tramite, non ita pridem recessum fuerit, sequens species facti, Inclytam Comissionem uberius informabit.
Tertius jam lapsus est mensis, a quo Judaus Isacus Kretzmer non pridem dipplomaticus chyrurgus theoreticas suas cognitiones sub manu ductione et recomendatione famosi illius Judai Salamonis Weisz, hujus item filii domatim ad instar medici oraculi facta, practice in obversum juramenti sui chyrurgici in perniciam humanitatis per gremium hocce difundere ceperat. Felici omine contigit, ut hic nefandas suas in re medica suscipiendas prevaricationes – per me jam detectas, et suo tempore uberius adhuc detegendas – medio mei velut instrumenti effectuandas decreverit. Non latuit preatactum Judaum Kretzmer nefarium suum propositum per me detectum haberi, nam brevi post detactam perniciosam illam tentationem non erubuit hic vindicte cupidus perjurus chyrurgus tam ipse, quam medio coripheorum suorum pharmacopolium meum – testantibus instrumentis visitationalibus recentissimis et optimis medicamentis in sufficiente quantitate dotatum – pro adulterato et vitiato difamare, ipsos vero infirmos, qui opera sua utebantur, a percipiendis ex pharmacopoleo meo mediamentis – sub comminatione quasi in meo pharmacopolio vitiata et nimium preciosa medicamina essent, ipse vreo ego una cum meo dipplomatico adjutore nullius farine homines essemus – deterrere et sic cunctas suas medicas prescriptiones cum prostitutione pharmacopolii, et honoris mei diminutione directe ad pharmacopolium Tunnerianum inviare. Hinc deinde factum est, quod ego tum ad salvandum honorem meum et conservandum pharmacopolii mei creditum, tum vero ad lucidius detegendas preatacti chyrurgi Kretzmer in praxim subseque deductas perniciosas machinationes et prevaricationes comissionem mixtam in preatactas maleversationes indagaturam, tam ab Inclytis statibus et ordinibus Comitatus hujusce, quam et Amplissimo Magistratu Zomboriensi ordinari petierim. Ad conciliandam expositioni mea fidem, quo ad provocationem Judai Kretzmer in me intuitu adulterationis medicamentrum et prescriptionum factam una cum dipplomatico adjutore meo Joanne Kuluntsits juramentum corporale offero: Relata vero ad id utrum saepe mentionatus Judaus Kretzmer ante et post mei tentationem preconceptas suas prevaricationes in prejudicium et oppressionem inferorum contribuentium directas ipse solus vel ne fors aliquo cooperante in effectum deduxerit? Apohtecam meam ut vitiosam difamaverit? Honorem ilem ac bonam existimationem persona mea et coadjutoris mei prosciderit, sequentes testes perhibebunt
1. Josephus Gutyan Areularis magister Szivatziensis
2. Josephus Gutyan - Uxor ejus
3. Josepha Fuchs gremialis Pistorio Ambrosii Fuchs in Capillis existens filia
4. Petrus Czvetkovits imigrator magister gremialis
5. N. Pavlovits sadalis mercantillis Petro Weszelinovitsianus
6. Dominus Fridericus Schmidt dipplomaticus pharmacopocus
7. Salamon Weisz Judaus gremialis
Non abs re fore censui sequentem mihi per Josephus Gutyan primum in ordinem testem, hujus item uxorem propositam quarimoniam qualiter nempe querulans ad pharmacopolium Tunnerianum inviatus, ibidem tractatus et ultimario eandem deferere coactus fuerit? Incltyta deputationis tratinis substernere
1. Quod prescriptiones medicas recepten Isaco Kretzmerianas ad rationem suam factas et erga inviationem prescribentis ad pharmacopolium Tunnerianum pro preparatione et expeditione deportatas, nec post exolutionem pretii, esto eas repetierit, rehabere potuerit.
2. Quod postquam fatens certim album spiritum pro cujus preparatione 48xros con. Monet. Solvere debuit, pluries in pharamacopolio Tunneriano semper tamen erga prescriptionem Kretzmerianam preparari curasset et post exolutionem recipe sibi restitui petiisset, antequam hoc eidem restitutum fuisset, in locum ab infra expositorum 48xr con. Mon. per Apothecarium deletorum, a supra 8xs con. Mon. appositi fuerint, quod probat recipe sub A no 2 in copia productum, cujus originale per fatentem resignabitur.
3. Quod fatenti postquam ultimam prescriptionem Kretzmerianam in pharmacoplio Tunneriano expediri curasset et hujus – vel ut exoluta – restitutionem serius ursisset, integra pharago prescriptionum, ut sibi ex hac suam seligeret, cum indignatione objecta fuerit, ac tandem non nisi erga iteratas seriores adursiones et declarationem quod ex illa pharagine suam prescriptionem cognoscere haud posset recipe sub A no 1 in copia demissa adlovutum, quod in origine etiam producetur, querulans tamen pro suo neutiquam recognoscit, imanuatum fuerit, recipe hoc est manuscriptum Kretzmerianum sine subscriptione ordinantis, unde colimari potest quod plures tales anonyma prescriptiones prefuisse debuerint, siquidem recte talis ex inadvertentia querulanti obtigerit que prescriptio 8f con.mon. taxata, legalem taxam excessive superare videtur cujus eruitionem Inclyta Comisio disponere dignetur.
4. Dum arcularius Gutyan de relicta Apotheca Tunneriana prescriptionem sub B no 1 fine confectionis medicamentorum ad meam pharmaciam tullisset et id ipsum Judaus Kretzmer rescivisset, ut eundem de indentitate pretii medicamentorum in meo et Tunneriana pharmacopolis vigentis dementaret, et excessivas solutiones in Tunneriana apotheca factas palliaret, isthic sub B no2,3,4 pretiosas prescriptiones in prejudicium et respective confusionem contribuentis Gutyan expedivit, sed nec destitit eundem Gutyan cum residuis duabus suis prescriptionibus sub C no 1,2 sub comminatione quod eidem secus nihil prescribere velit ex meo pharmacopolio ad Tunnerianum traducere; utrum autem preatacta prescriptiones sub B no 2,3,4 pro 5/4 anni prole facta indicative et conscientiose ordinari potuerint Inclyta Comisionis alto judicio substernitur.
Cum jam super exposita perpleoritates cointeligentiam quandam inter chyrurgum et pharmacopocum presuponerent id quoque hic attingere censui quod pharmacopola Tunner et chyrurgus Kretzmer in suspicioso tractatu per Joannem Kuluntsits uberius explanabuntur.
In ulteriorem excessiva taxationis medicamentorum comprobationem advolvitur etiam prescriptio(s) chyrurgi Topolyiensis Arasser sub …… pro Victore Dominali Topolyensi in pharmacopolio tunneriano expedita, dignetur proinde Inclyta Comissio dijudicare, ubi et in quantum super taxationes practicari soleant.
Quod pharmacopolium meum bonis et sufficientibus medicamentibus instructum sit perhibent officiosa visitationalia instrumenta et attestata respectivorum gremialium dominorum physicorum et chyrurgorum sub …. humillime advoluta; si proinde prescripta per chyrurgum Kretzmer medicamenta debitum effectum in infirmis non producunt, ratio defectus hujus non ab expediente verum a prescribente repetenda est, quod eo magis certum est siquidem advoluta hicce sub no 8….. Prescriptiones adeo inconsequenter apposita sint, ut nullus vel faltem valde exignus effectus prosperari possit.
Relata denique ad mihi per duos gremiales medentes inde a duorum annorum effluxu calumniose appictum taxa medicamentorum pretensum excessum me humillime declaro, quod pro singulo comprobando transgressionis acta 24 aureorum poena vigore intimati Regii dictata memet sponte subjiciam.
Si tamen quispiam exurgeret qui cum violatione Taxa sine comprobatione me calumniose proscindere intenderet, qua injustus sub quai cunque larva proprium suum lucrum quarendo in coniventia cum secundo juste considerati potest; dignetur Inclyta Comissio juxta premissa judicare, cur excessus violationis legalis taxa alibi practicatus mihi appingi studeatur? Cur duo viri suas omnis generis prescriptiones cum nominis et honoris mei agravio inde a duobus annis in apothecam Tunnerianam dirigant? Cur false calumniose proscindat, quod apud me medicamenta excessive Chara sint, quali cunque excessisivo pretio alibi solvantur? Quastio sine lessione conscientia facile solvenda veniet, si de eo quis se convincere velit, quod tales suos in lucrum proprium directa lusus in turpido cum tertii ruina continuare studeant.
Hinc Inclyta Comissioni humillime supplico, quatenus sumpta in gratiosam considerationem preatacta rationum momenta, me a periculo hororis et facultatum mearum interitus liberare chyrurgum vero Judaum Isacum Kretzmer velut perversi genii et depravatorum morum hominem sui in demeritum aliorum vero salutare ad exemplum e gremio civitatis et Inclyti Comitatus hujusce eliminandum Inclytis statibus et ordinibus et Amplissimi Magistratui Zomboriensi gratiose proponere dignaretur. Qui in reliquo jugi cum venerationis cultu persevero.
Zomborini die 18 januarii 1825.
Actum visitationis pharmacia domini Alexandri Peak in concursu clarissimi viri Caroli Bulla Comitatus Batsiensis ord. Physici perillustris item domini Mathia Josits Senatoris una et Civitatis capetanei tamquam ad hunc actum pro testimonio legali comissionati peregimus, posteaquam ordine cuncta pharmaca perlustrassemus, plura in trutinam sumpsimus reperrimusque tam composita quam et preparata juxta leges pharmaceuticas rite confecta, atque preparata, simplicia item in sufficienti quantitate adinvenimus. Quod vero activiora, ut et venena attinet, hac sub peculiari seratura una cum bilancibus atque ponderibus reclusa tenentur. Sigilatum Zombor 11. 9bris 1824.
Carolus Bula m.p.
G. Comitatus Bacsiensi physicus ordinarius
Mathias Loosz m.p.
Ord. Civitatis physicus
Coram me Mathia Jozits m.p. Senator et Capitaneus qua tamen ad hunc actum juditer commissionato
Infrascriptus presentium per vigorem et vi officii mei conscientiose fidem facio et testatum reddo: quod ego pharmacopocam per dominum Alexandrum Peak dipplomaticum apothecarium in Libera ac Regia Civitate Zombor erectam, tam occasione institutarum prescriptarum visitationem quam et privative factarum crebriorum invisionum – quamadmodum officiosa mea relationes hoc in objecto publico exhibita ubertim loquuntur – semper in optimo statu quibus vis videlicet apparatibus in fructam optime qualitatis pharmacis et obtutu promptissima eaque accurata medicamentorum expeditionis, individuis in arte pharmaceutica qualificatis provisam repererim, adeo quidem ut antelatus domino apothecarius indeffesa sua industria, et Zelo, tam mei quam et cunctorum sub cura mea constitutorum agrorum, quibus pharmacis illius uti hucdum contigit plenum contentum et complacentiam promeritus sit. In cujus fidem presens nominis subscriptione et usualis sigilli muramine roboratum attestatum extradedi. Zomborini die 10a januarii 1825. Carolus Bulla m.p. medic. Doctor et Inclytorum Comitatum Bacs et Bodrog art. Unitor Physicus ordinarius.
Naredni tekst je na nemačkom
Humillima informatio Alexandri Peak in merito malversationis Judai chyrurgi Isaci Kretzmer exporrecta.
Deutri puncta pro Petro Pavlovits sodale mercantili Petro Veszelinovitsiana contra Judaum chirurgum Isacum Kretzmer directa.
1. Utrum fatens noscat Judaum chyrurgum Kretzmer et unde?
2. Depromat fatens, utrum is eundem chirurgum Kreczmer per prestando modis auditis in sua infirmitate requisiverit aut idem chirurgus per alium comendatus et adlatus fuerit?
3. Dum idem chirurgus suam primam prescriptionem recipe prestitisset qualem inviatiorem dedit, unde et ex qua apotheca medicamenta adferantur? Et ex quo motivo?
4. Scitne, aut aliquam notitiam habetur fatens, quod chirurgus Kreczmer contra personam et pharmaciam domini Alexandri Peak caluminose detractorio et scandalose debachatus quibusque expressionibus usus fuerit?
Deutri puncta pro Petro Czvetkovits inhabitatore et Smigmatore Zomboriensi contra Judaum chirurgum Isacum Kretzmer directa.
1. Utrum fatens noscat Judaum chyrurgum Kretzmer et unde?
2. Depromat fatens utrum Judaum chirurgum Kretczmer pro prostando in Hydrope decumbenti matri modis auxilio requisiverit? Aut idem chirurgus per alium comendatus et adlatus fuerit?
3. Dum Judaum chirurgus Kreczmer primam visitam ad fatentis matrem in Hydrope cubantem fecisset 100 florinos w.w. petuntur plenariam restitionem spopondit. Matre centum florinos solvendi se incapacem declarante pro eadem visita chirurgus pretendebat 5 florinos, accepit tamen duos, Judao chirurgo declarante, quod residuos 3 florenos filius Salamonis Veisz quo servitur ejus pro se retinera voluit? Recenseat fatens circumstantialiter sub ….. cursum hujus negotii?
4. Dum idem nominatus chirurgus suam primam prescriptionem recipe fatenti transdidisset, qualem invitationem dedit, unde et ex qua apotheca medicamenta adferantur, ut ex quo motivo?
5. Utrum fatens post exolutionem medisamentorum in Pharmacia Tunneriana resttitutionem prescrptionem urserit? Et receperit an non?
6. Pro parocentesi abdominis in Hzdrope cubantis foemina matris fatentis pretendit Judaus chirurgus 50 florenos w. hac pretensio 50 fl. w fuit ne ad plenam resanationem destinata? Vel pure pro exigua illa operatione recenseat fatens?
Deutri puncta Josepham filiam in Capillis Pistris Zomboriensis de Ambrosii Fuchs contra Judaum chirurgum Isacum Kretzmer directa, concernentia.
1. Utrum fatens noscat Judaum chyrurgum Kretzmer et unde?
2. Dum arcularii Josephi Gutyan prolis apud fatentem in firma morata fuisset et fatens unam prescriptionem per Judaum chirurgum factam recepisset, qualem accepit aut audivit inviationem prescribentis chirurgi, unde et ex qua apotheca medicamenta adferantur?
3. Qualem fatens protulit in pharmacia expressionem intuitu cointeligentia Judai chirurgi per pharmacia Tunneriana proverbio usa ..... ..... et quid tali expressioni ansam prebuit?
4. Scitne et aliquam notitiam habetne fatens per se vel ab alio audivisse quod Judaus chirurgus Kreczmer contra personam et pharmaciam domini apothecarii Alexandri Peak et personam coadjutoris ejus diplomaticum Ivannem Kuluntsits caluminose detractorie et scandalose quibusque expressionibus usus fuerit?
Deutri puncta Josephi Gutyan et ejus uxoris in merito hujus inquisitionis contra Judaum chirurgum Isacum Kreczmer directa.
1. Noscitne fatens Judaum chirurgum Isacum Kreczmer, et unde?
2. Requisivitne fatens supra nominatum chirurgum fine infirma proli sua suppeditandi medici auditii, aut idem per alium comendatus, et adlatus exstitit?
3. Prima prescriptiones per nominatum chirurgum Kretczmer pro prole fatentis facta et idem tradicta, deditne idem chirurgus ex qualem inviationem ex qua apotheca medicamenta adferantur?
4. Inviatione taliter ad Tunnerianam apothecam fine preparationis medicamentorum interventa, curavitne fatens ibidem plures prescriptiones /recipe/ expediri?
5. Suntne in eadem Tunneriana apotheca prescriptiones recipe statim taxata et post exsolutionem restituta?
6. Utrum fatens restitutionem exolutorum prescriptionum usavit et qualem declarationem accepit?
7. Scintne pro manibus fatentis aliqua prescriptiones nominati chirurgi quas e pharmacia Tummeriana recipere protuit?
8. Talestne fatens recordari quid et quantum pro singulis prescriptionum medicinis solverit?
9. Hic una prescriptio recipe nominati chirurgi Kreczmer occurit In qua certus albus spiritus continetur in qua prescriptione inferius exposita 48x c.m. taxa deleta littera tamen c.m. hoc est con. Mon. exstant. Superius vero 8xris taxa designata est, curavitne fatens saepius hunc album spiritum expediri, et quid semper pro eo solverit, quamodo hac variatio consideranda veniat? Fatens exponat?
10. Indetidem hic occurit una prescriptio propria manu Judai chirurgi cum aliis omnibus prescriptionibus hic productis in scriptura aequaliter coherens, sine tamen subscriptione nominis ordinatis chirurgi – continet in se decoctum et pulveres recenseat fatens utrum hac prescriptio pro sua infirma prole expedita sit, et declaret quomodo ad hanc prescriptionem sine nominis subscriptione venerit, nam in pharmacia expedita, et cum 8f c.m. taxata observatur?
11. Ubi fatens reliquas hic productas medicamentorum prescriptiones Judai chirurgi expediri curavit? Exponat?
12. Quare deservit fatens pharmaciam Tunnerianam et quare pro recipiendis per chirurgum Kreczmer prescriptis medicamentis devenit in pharmaciam Peakianam?
13. Quare identidem fatens desevit pharmaciam Peakianam et redivit cum ultimis duabus prescriptionibus chirurgi kreczmer pro recipiendis medicamentis ad pharmaciam Tunnerianam? Facitne ex inviatione et protensione ejusdem chirurgi Kreczmer?
14. Dum fatens Tunnerianam apothecam deseruisset et cum prescriptionibus chirurgi Kreczmer pro recipiendis medicamentis in pharmaciam Peakinanam se convertisset, utrum nominatus chirurgus Kreczmer ultroquoque continuaverit prescriptionis formam, altum pretium medicamentorum remonstrantem?
15. Quot annos aetatis numeravit fatentis prolis et qualem infirmitatem designavit chirurgus? Siquidem per eundem facta prescriptiones pro uno misero contribuenti nimis gravantes viderantur? Et utrum post fatens expensas infirma prolis sanitas restituta fuit.
16. Scitne, aut aliquam notitium habetne fatens, quod Judaus chirurgus Kreczmer contra personam et pharmaciam domini apothecarii Alexandri Peak et personam coadjutoris ejus diplomaticum Joannem Kuluntsits caluminose, detractotie et scandalose debachatus, qualibusque expresionibus usus fuerit?
17. Scitne, aut aloquam notitiam habetne fatens, quod idem Judaus chirurgus nominatus sit in occlusionem pharmacia d. pharmacopoei Peak procedere?
Naredni dokument je na nemackom
In nexu inquisitionis quoad imposturas et machinationes Judai chyrurgi Isaaci Kretzmer practicatas per J.J S.S. et O.O. comitatus hujusce et Amplissiumu Magistratus Libere Regieque Civitatis Zomboriensis exmissam mixtam commisionem dedato 19a januarii 1825. interventam mihi comissum habetur, quatenus in decursu hujus cause rem sanitatis medicam concerventia objecta asummere adcopulatas chyrurgi Kretzmer prescriptiones examinare cum fassionibus testium ad deutri puncta electis combinare et opinionem meam deponere velim quibus taliter reasumptis examinatis et combinatis sequentes medicas reflexiones vi officii demisse substerno.
Quod Judaus chyrurgus Isaacuc Kretzmer in obversium juramenti sui chyrurgici contra omnem humanitatam in preniciem et enervationem contributium lucri proprii querendi studio dominum pharmacopoum gremialem Alexandrum Peak in excessivas proscriptionum per eundem chyrurgum ordinatum taxationes in falsificationem earum et adulterationem medicamentorum provocaverit, ipsa deposito corporali juramento j. commisioni in forma specificati exporrecta et hic sub no 6o adcopulata remonstratio domini pharmacopoi Alexandri Peak, taliter aeque deposito corporali juramento scripto interventa ex hic sub no 5 adcopulata fassio diplomatici coadjutoris domini pharmacopoi Peak domini Joannis Kulutsits, non secus sub juramento exporrecta dua testimonia sub no 3 et 4 adcopulata dominorum Josephi Molnar honor chyrurgi civici et Adalberti Hanke protocollista, quod idem dominus pharmacopous Peak Judeo chyrurgo post provocationem vix ex apotheca excesso, iis vero comparentibus provocationem chyrurgi Kretzmer instanter detexerit, unde poro secuta est domini senatoris una ….. capitanei Amplissimo Magistratui sine peragenda inquisitionis exporecta relatis, ad evidentiam comprobant
Idem chyrurgus Kretzmer tentatam suam provocationem propriis suis hic sub no 8 adcopulatis 8 prescriptionibus eo magis confirmat.
Ha octo prescriptiones indigitant plures contra altissimos ordinis in hoc merito premisos et perpetratos abusus qui sine conniventia inter chyrurgum et pharmacopoum nunquam hac forma in effectum deduci potuissent.
Tentatione chyrurgi Kretzmer, qua mediante pharmacopoum dominum Alexandum Peak in machinationem sibi associare cupiebat non succedente sequi detulit ut provocator chyrurgus denegantem pharmacopoum pro inimico suo proclamando, omnes suas, suis agrotis fiendas prescriptiones cum impositione – vindicte studio – cum detrimento honoris et fiducia pharmacia Peakiane illuc dirigere studeat, ubi ejus principiis paruere, ut no 7 puncto 3 et 13 ita no 10 puncto 2 ita no 12 puncto 3 – provocator chyrurgus Kretzmer ea jam temeritate turgebat, ut declarare non erubuerit, nisi Peak votis ejus paruerit et posteram ejus occludi procuratorum ut fassiones sub no 7 puncto 17 clare probant.
Anno proxime evoluto duo benignosa intimata intervenerunt, in primo precipitor ut phatmacopoi prescriptionibus illico taxas apponant, in secundo ut exoluta prescriptiones medicamentorum concernentibus restituantur: jam vero in casu presenti exolutarum prescriptionum restitutiones iteratis vicibus postulate supprese no 7 puncto 5,6,8 docentur quin imo posteaquam chyrurgo Kretzmer innotuisset, quod contribuens orcularius Gutyan Tunnerianam apothecam deseruisset et in Peakianam transivisset, ut precessarum prescriptionum suarum excessivam taxationem palliaret, cum capacitare cupiens quari in alia apotheca parformiter charo pretio medicamenta forent, sine fundamento, sine indicatione infirmitatis sales fecerit alti pretii prescriptiones que juxta proventus primi ordinis domini Terrestris, nunquam tamen pro misero contribunte ordinari potuissent, id docetur in prescriptionum serie sub A 1, et sub B 3,4,5.
In remonstrationem premissorum substerno has octo Kretzmerianas prescriptiones.
Juxta fasionem contribuentis Szivatsiensis Josephi Gutyan no 7 puncto 4 occurit, quod precedentes chyrurgi Kretzmer plures prescriptiones ad iteratas petitiones non restituta constiterint ex aliquibus pulveribus et certo albo spiritus ut sub A no 2 et C no 1,2 videri est si istque harum prescriptionum usum cum tali quali succesu applicuit, quali conscicutia ex fundamento potuit pro equali scopo, posteaquam ei innotuisset, quod pro patiente ex alia apotheca medicamenta adferantur , medicamenta sub B 3,4,5 contenta ordinare? Ut nimirum sicut premisi suarum prinovarum prescriptionum excessivam taxationem palliare possit: id ipsum confirmatum in fatentis puncto 13 qualiter chyrurgus Kretzmer eumdem fatentem denuo in Tunnerianam apothecam transferendo sub C no 1,2 prescriptiones suas ad primi ordinis, sed tamen ad legalem taxam subjectas reduxerit.
Fatens in puncto suo 8vo exponit primevarum 5 prescriptiorum Kretzmerianorum nunquam reobtentarum solutiones pro primo 1f 30xr w.w. pro secundo 1f c.m. pro tertio 2f w.w. pariter pro quarto et quinto 2f w.w. assignando, quod hoc pretiumprescribens Judaus chyrurgus ipsi indixerit, in apotheca acceptis 2f w.w. nulla mentis de aliqua supra competentiam restitutione intervenerit, docet ejus fassis puncto 5. Pro prescriptione hac sub A no 2 primarica reobtenta exponit sub puncto suo fatens solvisse 2f w.w. seu 48xr c.m. sicut prescribens chyrurgus ipsi indictavit, sed huc prescriptio non plus quam 8 idest octo xros c.m. efficit, quam serio urgente dum recepisset, inferius 48xr c.m. summa deleta et superius 8xri inscripti apparent, hinc sicut hec prescriptio 40x c.m. taxam legalem superat, ita precedanearum prescriptionum hinc similium uti puncto 4 remonstratus taxam excessisse clare probat est fatens puncto 9 dicit se ignorare quando et per quem hec taxa 48xr c.m. deleta fuerit.
Occurit in inquisitione porro, et hoc per fatentis no 7 puncto 13 et no 12 puncto 3 quod chyrurhus Kretzmer arguat D. pharmacopoeus Peak – siquidem inimicus ejus esset, mala medicamenta suppeditaturum. In confusionem hujus propositionis quod defectus in effectu medicamentorum non ab expediente, sed a proscribente dependeat, occludit D pharmacopous Peak prescriptiones Kretzmerianas quatuor hic adcopulatas sub 8 et ……. E.F.G.H ex quibus experiri mihi licuit, qoud prime tres E.F.G. prescriptiones adeo inconsequenter prescripte sint, ut ex iis exiguus vel nullus effectus sperari possit: prescriptione autem sub G. ingredientia e chinosis roborantibus, laxantibus, diureticis consistentia, ita sibi metipsis in effectu contraria sunt ut ordinaritis intentio, quem scopum alsequi et cupis mali obicem ponere velit? Nullo parto cognosci possit.
Quoad duas Kretzmerianas pro fatentis prole factas prescriptines ut sub B no 3,4 videre est, id adhunc observatum fuit, quod idem chirurgus cum mercurio adeo excessive usus fuerit, ut mirandum sit 5/4 annorum prolem adhuc in vivis esse.
Occurit tandem una sub anonymo sine subscriptione nominis ordinantis chyrurgi intervenda prescriptio in apotheca 8f c.m. taxata et expedita hic sub A no 1 adcopulata, quam fatens pro sua non agnoscit, ad quam tamen ita devenisse sub puncto suo C asserit, dum nempe idem antequam Tunnerianam apothecam desernisset, perultime sue prescriptionis restitutionem petendo a Domino apothecaris Tunner intellexerit, eandem per Judaum chyrurgum oblatam esse; dum itaque eam a Judao repetiisset, in locum ex apotheca oblata prescriptionis hoc ex in advertentia ei obtuerit recipe. Tales sub anonymo prescriptiones qua semper ad prevaricationem tendent, debuerunt pluros buisse, tum fatenti inopinate e pluribus talis obtigerit.
Pro conclusione hanc adhuc reflexionem meum demisse substerno, sicut in hac quoque causa occurit et mihi hinc inde experiri licuit, tales inter nonnullos medentes in gremio existentes vigore abusus, quod preclaros secus viros pharmacopeos, seu ex rancore privato, seu proprii emolumenti studio hinc inde ita prescribant, quod quippe malas expeditiones faciant, mala medicamenta servent, excessiva pretio supra taxam medicamenta expediunt , taliter patientes a pharmacopois terrere, omnes suas prescriptiones cum detrimento honoris et fiducia pharmacopoi aloirum inviare studeant, tales caluminosse diffuse proscriptiones fiduciam persone et pharmacie ejusdem pharmacopoi tollunt, eundem coram sublito odiosum reddunt et brevi temporis decursu innocentem in recuiam et extremam egestatem regrimunt.
Per visitationes annuas pharmaciarum per physicos coram testimoniis legalibus institui solitas eo a fortiori – cum physicis accessus in apothecas pateat, saepius etiam inopinate in officiendi, manipulationes in apotheca vigili oculo lustrandi, hinc inde expeditiones observandi, de integritate pharmaciarum et bonitate medicamentorum tam simplicium quam compositorum singulus adjuratis physicus vi conscientie cavere debet.
Casum in eum si aliquem pharmacoponum a via recta recedere observaret, talem primo paterne monere , tandem striotius cum minatione covigere, his non fructificantibus, concernentibus jurisdictionibus defere obligatur.
Hinc es esset mea demissa opinio ut tales in prevaricationem tendentes abusus tollantur, miseri contribuentes ab manibus expensis conserventur, pharmacopei a vexis et caluminosis proscriptionibus subleventur, quatenus J.J. Jurisdictionibus eas facere dignerentur dispositiones, etiam si via Excelsi Consilii R. …… Hungarici ut fiducia medentium et pharmacoporum ultro qouque coram publico in salvo permaneat, contribuentes vero cum fiducia tam ad medicos quam et pharmacias hinc metu elusionis comparere valeant. Sigilatum Zombor die 6a februarii 1825.
J. Comitatus Bacsiensis ord. physicus
Naredni dokument je na nemackom
Infrascriptus annorum 28, R.Cath, caleos deposito corporali coram Inclyta deputatione in maleversationes Judai chirurgi Kretzmer investigate corporali juramento fateor: quod Dominus Alexander Peak gremialis pharpacopous dum quadam mensis octobris 1824 die ad pharmacopolium ejus venissem mihi detexerit quod chyrurgus Isaacus Kretzmer, quem locum e pharmacopolio egrrendi videram, eundem recte ante mei adventum eo provocaverit; ut sibi – falsis et supposititiis pharamceuticus prescriptionibus, ad pharmacopolium suum sine preparationis inviandis, usuro, excessivarum taxarum desumptione, et medicamentorum per se prescribendorum adulteratione auxiliatricem operam prestaret et proditurum ex hac delumbatione luctum secum subdivideret: eumdem tamen penes inprobationem scelerata sine intentionis surtis auribus exceperit. Fuit eorum in pharmacopolio Peakiano etiam gremialis Civicus chyrurgus dominus Josephus Molnar cui pariformiter preattacta Judai maleversatio in presentia mei d. alexandrum Peak detecta exstitit. Zombor die 19a januarii 1825.
Adalbertus Hanke Regnum Hungarie juratus fori utriusque ... Advocatus
Infrascriptus annorum 37, R.cath, uxoratus gremialis civicus chyrurgus deposito previe coram Inclyta deputatione mixta in maleversationibus Kretzmerianas investigante corporali juramento fateor: quod dominus Alexander Peak gremialis pharmacapeus – dum quodam mensis octobris 1824 die ad pharmacopolium ejus venissem – mixi detexerit, quod chyrurgus Issacus Kretzmer, quam ante mei advertum e pharmacopolio suo obivisse dixerat eundem paulo ante mei advertum eo provocaverit ut sibi falsis et supposititiis pharmaceuticis prescriptionibus ad suum pharmacopolium sine preparationis inviandis, usuro, excesivarum taxarum desumptione et medicamentorum perse perscribandarum adulteratione auxiliatricam operam prestaret et proditurum ex hac delumbatione lucrum secum subdevideret: eundem tamen penes improbationem sceleratae sua intentionis surdis aurieus exceperit. Fuit ..... pharmacopolio Peakiano etiam dominus Adalbertus Hanke causarum advocatus cui parinformiter preattacta Judai maleversatio in presentia mei per D Alexandrum Peak detecta exstitit. Zombor die 19a januarii 1825.
Civitatis …. chyrurgus
|We, the undersigned, after the investigation of numerous machinations and misdemeanors committed by Mr. Surgeon Isak Krecmer and carried out with the assistance of a certain helper, if all of them caused severe and material damage to the health of the below, the case. Since there was already a decision of the General Assembly of Bačka County to conduct an investigation into the case, we bring here the content and course of the investigation to inform the High Magistrate and that he would review the results of the investigation and to added to the investigation elements concerning prescriptions and fees paid on them, which are prescribed by surgeons and doctors, and that the whole case would be considered in its entirety. Certified in Sombor on February 8, 1825.
Matija Jozić, senator, authorized by the Magistrate
Stefan Esterganji, senator, also authorized
Jovan Lpaj, notary, also authorized by the Magistrate
On January 19, 1825, in the free royal city of Sombor, in Bačka County, the senators issued an order to conduct an investigation against a member of the Jewish community of surgeons Isak Krecmer, and the order was specifically issued by Captain Matija Jozić, all for machinations and misdemeanors. the person in question allegedly committed against the citizens, endangering their health and causing damage to them, and partly due to the violations he committed that he inflicted on public pharmacists. Therefore, in order to preserve public health, and on the basis of the order of the Assembly of Bačka County, and then the Magistrate in Sombor, we conducted the mentioned investigation. First, Mr. Pharmacist, a member of the community, Alexander Pejak, in the form of document number 1, presented the case of violations and machinations with a record of testimonies, and numerous prescriptions that relate in part to the mentioned surgeon Kretsmer - because he wrote them and of which he is part sent to Pejak's pharmacy and part to Tuner's pharmacy with specific and specific fees to be paid for the prescribed drugs. The mentioned recipes are evidence for one type of embezzlement, and here they are combined with testimonies about endangering the health of the undersigned witnesses as seen in Appendix No. 2. Appendix No. 2 shows other points of misdemeanors and attempted embezzlement, where the aforementioned Kretsmer tried to list Alexander's pharmacy Mr. Surgeon of the City of Sombor Jozef Molnar, pharmacist apprentice Ivan Kulenčić and recorder of the City of Sombor Albert Hanke, who first presented his statements marked 2, 4 and 5 in writing to the aforementioned Aleksandar, were questioned by Pejak on the payment of unnecessary fees and charges. In order to further clarify all that was later stated under item 6, as part of the investigation against surgeon Isak Krecmer and his embezzlement regarding the collection of excessive fees and restricting the use of prescriptions he wrote himself, Jozef Gutjan, a 27-year-old married Catholic, was the first to take the oath. according to the profession of carpenter, from Novi Sivca, who presented the following in Annex 2:
1. That he did not know the Jewish surgeon Isak Krecmer who moved to Sombor before he entrusted his sick daughter to him for treatment some time ago.
2. He stated that he knew nothing about this surgeon until he brought his sick daughter to Sombor, on the basis of the recommendation of the Jewish son Salamon Weiss, who praised the skill of the above-mentioned surgeon Kretsmer and advised him and his wife to see this doctor. they take their daughter.
3. That the mentioned surgeon took over the treatment of their daughter, that he prescribed the medicine and soon convinced his wife to procure the medicine in the older pharmacy of Franjo Tuner, assuring her that he would get better quality medicine and at a much lower price.
4. The witness's wife, convinced that he was talking, immediately procured the medicines in question, and since the surgeon wrote new prescriptions every day, the medicines were brought in every day and consisted of certain solutions and powders that were supposed to be used every day. write a new prescription and they were different, although they were / medicines / of identical appearance and quality.
5. The mentioned surgeon determined that the fee for each prescription was 2 florins and although the pharmacy was no longer paid, the prescriptions were not returned.
6. At that time, the mentioned wife, as well as the witness, fearing that they would be forced to pay again for the already paid medicines for the treatment of their sick daughter, asked the pharmacist Tuner to return the mentioned prescriptions and managed to get back only one of the pharmacy assistants Drieszbenger, and Mr. Tuner himself claimed to have returned the other prescriptions to the surgeon Krecmer.
7. The witness further states that he received the prescription number 8 from the surgeon himself and another of Drieszberg's assistant pharmacists, which was used on October 11, 1874, and that he did not get any other Kretsmer's prescription back thanks to Kretsmer's assurance that in that way get drugs cheaper.
8. The mentioned witness claims that each time he had to pay for the mentioned drugs in Tuner's pharmacy: once for drugs that were made in the pharmacy according to Krecmer's prescription, one floren and 30 krajcars, the second time individually one floren of conventional coins for 8 doses. solution and powder. There is also a supplement with 9 doses, each of which he had to pay 2 florins of Viennese coin, as well as for medicines under 4 and 5 for which he never got a prescription back, being forced to pay 2 florins of Viennese coin for exactly the same a thing he later received from Pejak's pharmacy for a total of 50 krajcars of Viennese coin.
9. The medicines listed in Appendix No. 9 were procured from Tuner's pharmacy and for each dose 2 florins of Viennese coin were paid, while for everything else the fee that accompanies it was changed or deleted, as the witness claims.
10. The prescription in question is set out under paragraph 7, however, the witness never received the medication indicated here when he went to the pharmacy with the prescription and the prescription was allegedly returned to the said surgeon Kretsmer.
11. Everything stated in Annex B under items 1, 2, 3 and 4 and in Annex C under items 1 and 2, the said witness was eventually given in Pejak's pharmacy, both the medicines and the prescriptions that were returned to him.
12. The mentioned witness explains that he received the first dose of medicine prescribed by Krecmer for his daughter from Pejak's pharmacy for the simple reason that his daughter was accommodated in the home of Ambrose Fuchs, near the city Curia, and that she was sick there. it was too much to go even to Tuner's pharmacy, which is much further away, and the other reason that in the end he completely turned to Pejak's pharmacy was that Tuner paid 2 florins of Viennese coins for each tuner, while medicines in Pejak's pharmacy cost 5 coins in total and had a far better effect on his sick daughter.
13. The witness stated that Pejak's pharmacy was doing much worse because it was the responsibility of surgeon Kretsmer, who was in a personal quarrel with Pejak and therefore assured people that Pejak did not have quality medicine and that medicine could be obtained from Tuner at a lower price.
14. Kretsmer's recipes cited in item 11 are attached, and will be shown within the scope of Annex B under items 1, 2, 3 and 4.
15. A sick daughter who is one year and three months old suffers from rickets and the mentioned surgeon assured the witness that he was lucky to run into him because supposedly no one else would be able to cure his daughter, although the girl still suffers from the same disease.
16. The witness claims that he never heard the mentioned surgeon Kretsmer speak badly on a personal level against Aleksandar Pejak and his pharmacy, but that he nevertheless mentioned to him that he recommended Tuner's more than Pejak's pharmacy.
17. However, the mentioned surgeon Kretsmer stated before him on one occasion that he had parted ways with Aleksandar Pejak and that if Mr. Pejak did not obey him, he would do everything to close his pharmacy.
Katarina, born Partl, the wife of the mentioned Jozef Gutjan, a master carpenter from Novi Sivac, aged 23, was also questioned afterwards. She testified under oath as a witness that she agreed with her husband in everything, except for what is written under item 17, because she did not hear it personally and therefore cannot testify.
The previous witnesses, and under paragraph 7, were joined and examined under item 10 by a new witness, the daughter of Jozef Ambrozi Fucht, 16 years old, who stated the following under oath under Annex 2:
1. That she knows the Jewish surgeon Isak Krecmer well because she nursed the daughter of Jozef Gutjan, a carpenter from Novi Sivac, in her home and that she was in daily contact with the person in question.
2. Whenever the mentioned surgeon Kretsmer copied prescriptions for medicines for a sick girl, he always gave her an order to bring the mentioned medicines from Tuner's pharmacy, regardless of the fact that Pejak's pharmacy was far closer and located in the immediate vicinity of the girl's current residence.
3. He says that he knows nothing about points 3, 4 and 5.
Petar Cvetković, a 23-year-old immigrant and resident of the city of Sombor, married and of the Orthodox faith, added the following testimony under oath to item 11:
1. That he knows the Jewish surgeon Isaac Kretsmer very well, partly thanks to the fact that he lives within the community of the city of Sombor and takes care of the sick, and partly because he undertook the treatment of his sick mother.
2. He stated that at that time his mother was suffering from water sickness and that his Jewish neighbor, Moses Hecht's wife, recommended the surgeon in question to him, and he invited him to treat his sick mother.
3. He then stated that surgeon Kretsmer had never directly asked for 100 florins for his mother's treatment, but that his family had told him that the surgeon in question had stated that he would ask for 50 florins if his mother was cured. He also stated that he paid 5 florins to the mentioned surgeon for the prescription and the mother's visit.
4. He did not state anything under item 4
5. He stated that after this payment he had received medicines from Tuner's pharmacy prescribed to him by the surgeon in question.
6. Everything has already been clarified in point 3
Witness Petar Pavlović, a 23-year-old merchant apprentice of the Orthodox faith, originally from Veliki Bečkerek, who is an apprentice to the citizen of Sombor and merchant Petar Veselinović, stated the following in Annex 2 under item 12:
1. That he knows the above-mentioned surgeon Isaac Kretsmer well because he turned to him for medical help.
2. He stated that when he felt ill, he turned to the surgeon in question and sought medical help.
3. That the surgeon in question prescribed certain drugs, but also stated that he did not accept or recognize prescriptions for drugs from Pejak's pharmacy, since Aleksandar Pejak, Mr. pharmacist, was his enemy, and although Pejak's pharmacy was far closer to him, that he was forced to procure drugs from Tuner's pharmacy.
4. Apart from what was attached in the previous point, he did not hear anything else
The witness, Mr. Friedrich Schmidt, a 24-year-old pharmacist, testified under oath under item 13 of the second attachment:
1. That he did not know the Jewish surgeon Isaac Kretsmer, who moved to the city community, too well, although he often had contacts with him before that.
2. That the surgeon in question very often, first in front of Mr. Franjo Tuner, and then in front of himself, was quite furious against Aleksandar Pejak and considered him / Kretsmer / a bad person, especially since it is clear from his prescriptions that he dealt with various malversations that did not befits an honest and valiant man.
Witness Salamon Weiss, a 54-year-old Jew from Sombor, married, and under oath according to his own custom in the synagogue, stated the following in relation to Annex 2, item 14:
1. To know the Jewish surgeon Isaac Kretsmer who lives in this place.
2. He stated in relation to the person in question that the surgeon in question, Kretsmer, had rescued his wife in a state of serious illness and that he had testified before the goldsmiths Vasilije Atanacković and Pavle Atanacković, and introduced him to the city community, recommended and praised him while the two others had respect for each other.
3. He did not state anything about points 3 and 4.
4. He did not state anything about points 3 and 4.
5. He states that it is true that he was very angry with the Jewish surgeon in question because at first he took over the treatment of his wife, who was in a very serious condition, but still left her case after some time, although she was not completely cured.
6. He also states that he left his son to the care of the surgeon Kretsmer in question in order for him to teach him the skill of surgery, but that there was no excessive benefit from that.
7. That, after noticing that his son was not acquiring the knowledge and skill he was to acquire from the surgeon in question, he withdrew his son from his service.
With its content and order, this document legally testifies to everything that has been exposed, and we hereby submit a report on that. Certified in Sombor, as stated above
A series of illegible signatures follows
Matija Jozić, senator, authorized by the Magistrate
Stefan Esterganji, senator, also authorized
Jovan Lpaj, notary, also authorized by the Magistrate
On the topic of numerous violations committed by the surgeon Mr. Isak Krecmer to the detriment of the undersigned
Points of the second contribution filed by the Jew Solomon Weiss against the Jewish surgeon Isaac Kretsmer.
1. Does the aforementioned know the Jewish surgeon Isaac Kretsmer and where from?
2. On the basis of what did the person in question come to the home of the mentioned surgeon and did he recommend the surgeon on the recommendation of his mother and to what extent was he aware of his expertise?
3. Surgeon Kretsmer was reported on the topic of various prescriptions which he then copied and which are all related to Weiss, so it should be explained under oath, in what way are Kretsmer and Weiss related and how far does it go?
4. Master Petar Cvetković stated that the surgeon Krecmer charged 5 Viennese florins for each visit to his mother who was suffering from water sickness, noting that the surgeon in question took only 2 Viennese florins, and that the remaining 3 were for himself. retained the son of Solomon Weiss for his services. The son, therefore, was on an equal footing with the surgeon Kretsmer, to the detriment and misfortune of all the signatories in the complaint, so the question arises as to what exactly is the form of their connection. Let the person in question explain.
5. It is claimed that the surgeon Kretsmer carried out various malversations in front of many, let the Salamon Weiss in question reliably state which ones exactly.
6. The son of the above-mentioned served for a time with the Jew Isaac Kretsmer, and Weiss had to pay him for the training he provided. What was the training fee? Let the witness present the information credibly
7. Is the mentioned son of Solomon Weiss still in the service of Isaac Kretsmer or not? If the compensation for that apprenticeship took the form of any kind of extortion, let the person in question state it.
The following questions in Appendix 2 against the Jewish surgeon Isaac Kretsmer were addressed to Mr. Friedrich Schmidt, the assistant pharmacist.
1. Does the person in question know the Jewish surgeon Kretsmer and where from?
2. Is he in any way aware of whether the surgeon in question, Kretsmer, made ugly slanders or information about Mr. Pharmacist Aleksandar Pejak or personal insults against his assistant Ivan Kulunčić, and what expressions he used on that occasion?
Since ancient times, health has been valued to such an extent that it was considered the greatest treasure in life, pleasure and the basis for earthly happiness and the peak of bliss. It is therefore natural that those in charge of him enjoyed a special honor. That is why it is not at all surprising that today, in more developed times, there is an additional effort to avoid all damages and injuries to health and to preserve and maintain that valuable as well as possible, and that care is entrusted to doctors, surgeons and pharmacists. This statement of mine will inform the esteemed commission in more detail to what extent it deviated from that correct path, which has never been the case before.
It has been three months since the Jew Isaac Kretsmer, a surgeon, underwent his theoretical knowledge and under the guidance and recommendation of the famous local Jew Solomon Weiss, whose son he also taught medicine for a while, in practice acted contrary to his medical oath and began to endanger the lives of the people in this urban community. It is a fortunate circumstance that I have already noticed his misdeeds and medical violations and that I have the opportunity to expose them on this occasion, because he also tried to use me as a means of his frauds. It's no secret that I noticed his tricks a long time ago, but even after I exposed him, he wasn't the least bit ashamed, but eager for revenge, he started slandering me and ruining my reputation among doctors and pharmacists - regardless of the fact that recent visits to my pharmacy showed that it contains the best drugs in more than sufficient quantities. In addition, he prevented the patients he specifically treated from obtaining drugs from my pharmacy under the pretext that my drugs were too expensive, spreading the story that my pharmacist's assistant and I were bad people, thus intimidating patients and all his prescriptions with machinations and the collapse of my reputation he referred to Tuner's pharmacy. Then it happened that I, in order to preserve my honor and reputation, and trust in my pharmacy, and also to clearly prove in practice and show the malversations and violations of the surgeon Kretsmer, asked to form a joint commission authorized by the administration. the whole County and by the exalted Magistrate of the city of Sombor. I swear that I made such a request because of the attack of the Jew Kretsmer, partly on me and my assistant Ivan Kulunčić, and partly because of the embezzlement with drugs and prescriptions that he committed. In this regard, I believe that it should be determined whether the above-mentioned Jew Kretsmer committed violations against the undersigned witnesses and patients both before and after I pointed out the problem, and whether he did it all alone or in cooperation with someone else. I also want him to say whether he spread a bad word about my pharmacy. The following witnesses will testify as to whether he tarnished the reputation and good name of both me and my assistant:
1. Jozef Gutjan, master carpenter from Sivac
2. Wife of Jozef Gutjan
3. Jozefa Fuhs, daughter of the baker Ambrose Fuhs
4. Petar Cvetković, an immigrant and now a resident of the city
5. Petar Pavlović, apprentice of merchant Petar Veselinović
6. Mr. Friedrich Schmidt, pharmacist
7. Solomon Weiss, a member of the Jewish community
I did not without reason think that Jozef Gutjan, the first witness in a row, as well as his wife who complained that they had been referred and then forced to go to Tumer's pharmacy, should be asked whether that was true. I present the following set of items to the esteemed commission in relation to the witness in question:
1. That he received prescriptions from Isak Kretsmer for prescription drugs that would be prepared and procured at Tumer's pharmacy, and that after payment he did not receive the prescriptions back even though he asked for them.
2. That after a certain white solution was prepared for him, the preparation of which costs 48 krajcars of a conventional coin, he was forced to pay significantly more for the same medicine in Tuner's pharmacy each time, according to Kretsmer's prescription. That when, after payment, he asked for the prescription to be returned to him, which can be seen in the attached recipe, it is noticeable that the amount of 48 krajcars of conventional coin was deleted and that another sum of 8 krajcars of conventional coin was written on it, which can be seen in Annex A under 2, which is a copy of the original of the document in question.
3. That after the witness in question took Krecmer's last prescription to Tuner's pharmacy and asked for it to be returned to him after payment, he received a whole bunch of various prescriptions with extremely rude behavior to find the one looking for them if he recognized him. A copy of this document can be found in Appendix A under number 1. When he first complained that he could not find the searcher among all these prescriptions, it turned out that Kretsmer's prescriptions did not contain his signature at all, and that there were a number of anonymous recipes. The witness complained that he paid a fee of 8 florins of a conventional coin for the prescriptions, for which it is clear to the esteemed commission that it greatly exceeds the amount of the legal fee charged for that.
4. When the carpenter Gutjan brought one of such prescriptions sent to Tuner's pharmacy, attached under B number 1, to my pharmacy, the Jew Kretsmer found out about it and removed his signature from the prescriptions for which he paid too much for medicines, and all those prescriptions attached. are under B under numbers 2,3 and 4. In this way, the damage to the mentioned Gutjan was caused and considerable confusion was caused, but that did not prevent the Krecmer in question from forcing Gutjan to send the two remaining recipes (Appendix C No. 1 and 2) to Tunerovo again. pharmacy, claiming he doesn't want anything to do with mine.
The fact that surgeon Krecmer and pharmacist Tuner performed all these malversations in mutual agreement will be explained in more detail by Ivan Kulunčić, my assistant. As another proof of how and in what amount the fees for medicines are paid, I also present the prescription of the surgeon Araser from Topola who treated a certain Mr. Viktor, so based on that, the respected commission will clearly judge when and in what amount the respective fees are paid.
In addition to all that, the report of the official visit to my pharmacy was humbly presented here, during which reputable city doctors and gentlemen determined that the pharmacy has valid medicines and that they have them in sufficient quantities. Therefore, when Kretsmer's surgeon's prescriptions did not have a real effect on the sick, he would write new prescriptions again in order to find the drugs as many times as possible, which is attached under number 8. It follows that the drugs he prescribed had no or almost no effect.
In short, this is about two members of the city community trying for two years to slander me for taking excessive and illegal fees for medicines, and according to the laws of this Kingdom, they are threatened with a fine of 24 gold coins per offense, so I ask the esteemed commission to the truth is established in this case.
Let the esteemed commission honor me with investigating whether I am committing a misdemeanor or someone insidiously with his helper is actually trying to gain benefit for himself by slandering others and trying to sew on others what he is actually doing. Why have these two people been persistently sending me all possible prescriptions to Tuner's pharmacy for two years, to my detriment? Why do they insidiously lie that medicines are too expensive for me, when in fact they are paid too expensive in a completely different place? The two of them are obviously trying to destroy me as a third party by gaining their own material benefit and completely ruin my reputation. Therefore, I humbly ask the esteemed commission to mercifully consider everything presented here, because I am only trying to free this city from the danger of the Jew Isaac Kretsmer, a surgeon, in accordance with my abilities, and I want his disobedience to be punished in a deserved way, and to set an example to all. the others will be expelled from this city community, in accordance with the decision of the County and the exalted Magistrate. Always available and humble in every sense, in Sombor on January 8, 1825.
Pharmacist from Sombor
The document on the official visit to the pharmacy of Mr. Aleksandar Pejak, which was made by the respected Mr. Karl Bula, the chief doctor of Bačka County, as well as Mr. Matija Jozić, who were authorized to testify in the court proceedings. We made a visit that was entrusted to us and we found that everything is in the best order in the mentioned pharmacy, that there are already prepared medicines according to all pharmaceutical rules, as well as a sufficient amount of ingredients for making other medicines. Somewhat stronger and more dangerous compounds and poisons, as a rule and with appropriate inscriptions, stood closed together with other pharmacy solutions and powders. Certified in Sombor on November 19, 1824.
Karol Bula, in his own way
Chief physician of Backa County
Matthias Loosz, in his own way
Chief city doctor
Matija Jozić, in his own way
Senator and captain who is also authorized in this court case
I, the undersigned by virtue of the duty and function I perform, conscientiously give the following testimony: That I, on the basis of an official decision, visited the pharmacy held by Mr. Aleksandar Pejak, a pharmacist in the free royal city of Sombor, public case entrusted. I found the pharmacy in the best condition, equipped with everything that is needed, and with the best quality medicines that are prepared quickly and accurately. I testify, therefore, that in addition to that, I and all those who were entrusted to my care used the services and medicines of the mentioned Aleksandar Pejak, who is an extremely hard-working and conscientious man. For the sake of validity of this document, it has been certified by my official seal. In Sombor, on January 10, 1825, Karol Bula, personally, doctor of medicine and chief physician of the famous counties of Bac and Bodrog.
Naredni dokument je na nemačkom
Humbly presented notice and testimony of Aleksandar Pejak in the case of embezzlement of the Jewish surgeon Isak Krecmer
Other questions for Petar Pavlovic, trade apprentice Petar Veselinovic in the case against Jewish surgeon Isak Krecmer:
1. Does the witness know the Jewish surgeon Isaac Kretsmer and where from?
2. Did he go alone for the treatment of the surgeon Kretsmer in the already exposed ways, or was the mentioned surgeon recommended to him by someone else?
3. When did the surgeon write his first prescription, for which pharmacy did he give instructions and where did he ask for the mentioned drugs to be brought? And for what reason?
4. Does the witness have any knowledge that the surgeon Kretsmer spoke badly about Mr. Aleksandar Pejak, slandered him and what expressions he used?
Other questions for Petar Cvetković, an immigrant and resident of the city of Sombor, in the case against the Jewish surgeon Isak Krecmer:
1. Does the witness know the Jewish surgeon Isaac Kretsmer and from where?
2. Did he personally seek medical help from a Jewish surgeon, Isaac Kretsmer, for a mother suffering from water sickness, or was someone else recommended to him by the surgeon in question?
3. Is it true that the Jewish surgeon Kretsmer during the first visit to his mother suffering from water sickness asked for the amount of 100 florins to completely cure her? Is it true that when the witness said he was unable to pay that much money, the surgeon asked for 5 florins for each visit, keeping only 2 florins for himself, while the remaining 3 were taken by Salamon Weiss, so that the two could continue their cooperation? ? Does the witness know the circumstances of their business agreement?
4. When did the surgeon write his first prescription, for which pharmacy did he give instructions and where did he ask for the mentioned drugs to be brought? And for what reason?
5. Did the witness get the prescription back after paying for the drugs at Tumer's pharmacy or not?
6. When surgeon Kretsmer said about 50 Viennese florins for puncturing water from his mother's abdomen that it was enough to cure her, or did he ask for more money for that small intervention?
Other questions for Witness Jozefa, daughter of Ambrose Fuchs, a bakery in the city of Sombor, in the case against Jewish surgeon Isak Krecmer:
1. Does the witness know the Jewish surgeon Isaac Kretsmer and from where?
2. While the daughter of the carpenter Jozef Gutjan was lying in the house of the mentioned witness and after she says that she saw how the Jewish surgeon wrote one of the prescriptions, from which pharmacy did he ask for the medicines in question to be brought?
3. What exactly did she hear that the Jewish surgeon in question said about his cooperation with Tuner's pharmacy and how exactly did he express himself on that occasion?
4. Is there any information, whether she personally witnessed it or heard it, that the Jewish surgeon Kretsmer said something bad against Mr. pharmacist Aleksandar Pejak, as well as about his pharmacy, or personally against his assistant Ivan Kulunčić and what expressions he used?
Further questions to Jozef Gutjan and his wife in the case of the Jewish surgeon Isak Krecmer:
1. Does the witness know the Jewish surgeon Isaac Kretsmer and from where?
2. Did the witness seek medical help for his sick daughter from the surgeon in question alone or on someone's recommendation?
3. When did the surgeon in question, Kretsmer, write the first prescription for his sick daughter, to which pharmacy did he refer him and where did he ask for the medicine to be brought?
4. Since he was referred to Tuner's pharmacy, without adequate preparation of medication, did the witness in question intend to take other prescriptions there as well?
5. Are the appropriate fees paid immediately for the prescriptions in Tuner's pharmacy and are the prescriptions returned after payment?
6. Did the witness request that the prescriptions he paid for be returned to him and what response did he receive?
7. Were there any prescriptions of the mentioned surgeon that he could get back from Tuner's pharmacy at all?
8. Does the witness remember exactly how much he paid for issuing individual prescriptions?
9. There is a recipe of the mentioned surgeon Kretsmer for making a certain white solution, where it was written below that the fee for its preparation costs 48 krajcars of a conventional coin, where that amount was then deleted and then in the text above the prescribed fee of 8 krajcars. Did the person in question monitor how many times that solution is mentioned in other recipes and why is there an obvious difference in the amount of fees paid? Let the witness state that.
10. A prescription appears among the evidence, apparently written by the surgeon Kretsmer (because the manuscripts match), and yet without his signature at the end. The recipe refers to some solution and powder. Is it a medicine used to treat his sick daughter and does he know, although it can be seen that he paid a fee of 8 florins of a conventional coin, how could he even use a prescription that does not have a signature at all?
11. Did the witness use other surgeries written in this way by surgeon Kretsmer? Let him explain.
12. Why did the witness eventually give up Tuner's pharmacy and why did he go to Pejakovo with prescriptions sent by Kretsmer to Tuner's pharmacy?
13. After that, why did he leave Pejakova again and go to Tuner's pharmacy again with the last two prescriptions of the surgeon Kretsmer? Did surgeon Kretsmer put pressure on him to do so?
14. When the witness left Tuner's pharmacy at one point and went to Pejakovo with Kretsmer's surgeon's prescriptions, did Kretsmer's surgeon continue to write prescriptions in the same way, still writing down the high prices of medicines and fees?
15. How old is the witness's daughter and what disease was she diagnosed by the surgeon? It can be seen from the prescription that the medicines are too expensive and too serious for the child and what he is suffering from. Did the surgeon in question claim that she would be completely cured thanks to those drugs?
16. Is there any information that the Jewish surgeon Kretsmer said something personally bad against Aleksandar Pejak and his pharmacy, as well as his assistant Ivan Kulunčić, and what exact expressions he used?
17. Is there any information that the Jewish surgeon claimed and threatened to initiate the procedure for closing Pejak's pharmacy?
Naredni dokument je na nemačkom
In connection with the investigation into the misdemeanors and frauds of the Jewish surgeon Isak Kretsmer, authorized by ............, and after the exalted Magistrate of the free royal city of Sombor formed a mixed commission on January 19, 1825, and entrusted me to consider this whole case concerning human health and to examine the prescriptions of the surgeon Kretsmer, with the statements of the witnesses and on the basis of both ex officio to express my opinion officially, I have the following to state:
That the Jewish surgeon Isak Kretsmer, contrary to the medical oath he took and inhumanely, and to the detriment and endangerment of those who testified here, approached the pharmacist of the city community, Aleksandar Pejak, persuading him to participate in the malversations of writing problematic prescriptions, collection excessive fees and falsification of prescriptions, and that is Mr. apothecary Aleksandar Pejak under oath, which is attached here under number 6 and stated. All the same, also under oath, in writing as Appendix 5, is the testimony of his pharmacist's assistant, Mr. Ivan Kulunčić. Two more testimonies are attached here, as Appendices 3 and 4, given by Messrs. Jozef Molnar, the city surgeon, and Adalbert Hanke, the recorder, to whom Mr. Pharmacist Pejak, immediately after the visit of the Jewish surgeon Kretsmer, very shockedly told what had just happened. then it was communicated to the exalted Magistrate for the purpose of conducting an investigation, which can also be checked in their records.
Surgeon Kretsmer himself speaks enough about the authenticity of this proposal under Appendix No. 8, which contains 8 of his prescriptions.
Attached are 8 problematic prescriptions intended for obvious abuses, which could not have been issued in this form, if there was no prior mutual agreement between the surgeon and the pharmacist.
After the attempt of the surgeon Kretsmer to make the apothecary Aleksandar Pejak an accomplice in the malversations failed, it happened that the surgeon in question declared the apothecary his enemy and all his prescriptions, slandering Pejakov and destroying the reputation of his pharmacy, and deliberately trying to instruct his patients. to another pharmacy, which is clearly shown in Annex 7 in items 3 and 13, in Annex 10 under item 2 as well as in Annex 12 under item 3. He was not in the least ashamed to state that if Pejak did not obey him, he would try in every way to close his pharmacy, and there are also statements about that within the box 7 under item 17.
Last year, it was added to this case that the mentioned pharmacy prescriptions were specifically attached, including those, and here they are in Annex 7 under items 5, 6 and 8, which were not returned to the injured party at first, although he asked for them several times. All of the above refers to the carpenter Gutjan, when the surgeon Kretsmer referred him to Tuner's pharmacy, and then he left that pharmacy and moved to Pejakovo in order to avoid paying excessive and inadequate fees. It was clear to him on that occasion that Kretsmer's stories about how the drugs in Pejak's pharmacy were too expensive completely without any basis, and all this can be clearly seen from Annex A under 1 and from Annex B under 3, 4 and 5.
As proof of all the above, I enclose these 8 Krecmer recipes.
On the subject of the statement of the witness from Sivac, Jozef Gutjan, under number 7, item 4, it is stated that there were numerous prescriptions of surgeon Kretsmer which were not returned to him despite repeated requests, and from the case of certain powders and white solution under A number 2 and C numbers 1 and 2, it is clear that the injured party used these drugs with some such success, so he hoped that, if the prescriptions were returned to him, he would be able to get the same from another pharmacy on more favorable terms, which is further confirmed in Annex B. under 3, 4 and 5. That he paid excessive and excessive fees for prescriptions was confirmed by the witness under item 13 where it can be seen that the surgeon Kretsmer referred him again with the last two prescriptions to Tamer's pharmacy (under C 1 and 2), but specifically on those two prescriptions, and after the damaged party's visit to Pejak's pharmacy, he was finally forced to write the legal amount of the mentioned fees.
The witness under item 8 gives 5 prescriptions that were not returned to him before, with the information that for the first he paid 1 floren and 30 krajcars of a Viennese coin, for the second 1 floren of a conventional coin, for the third 2 floren of a Viennese coin, 2 florins of Viennese coin, since the Jewish surgeon referred him to a specific pharmacy, where the prescriptions were persistently not returned to him, as he says in point 5 of his testimony. For writing the prescription for the medicine in Annex A, item 2, the injured party says that he paid 2 florins of Viennese coins, i.e. 48 krajcars of a conventional coin, as the surgeon who issued the prescription and wrote it down, and only 8 krajcars of a conventional coin actually had to be paid for that prescription, which can be seen from the fact that this figure was later deleted and the amount of 8 krajcars of conventional coin was written above it. coins, which means that the fee that the surgeon first wrote for 40 krajcars of conventional coins exceeds the actual and legal fee. All this, the same or similar, can be seen in point 4, whereby the witness states in point 9 that he does not know who and when deleted the former amount of 48 krajcars of a conventional coin.
It appears in the investigation that, as seen under both 7 in point 13 and under 12 in point 3, that surgeon Kretsmer claims that Mr. pharmacist Pejak, when he perceives himself as his enemy, makes poor quality medicines in his pharmacy. since the quality of medicines does not depend on the one who dispenses them, but on the one who writes prescriptions for them, the fact is that the 4 Kretsmer prescriptions attached here under 8 could not have had any great effect since they were written completely inconsistently and problematically. The recipes under G, which list the ingredients for strengthening the body, laxatives and diuretics, are so inconsistent and in contradiction with each other that one would think that they were written extremely maliciously.
The two prescriptions that Krezmer transcribed for the daughter of witness Gutjan, enclosed under B, testify that the surgeon used excessive amounts of mercury in the prescriptions to such an extent, that it is a real miracle that the girl remained alive at all.
Recipes without signatures, which were charged a fee of 8 florins, appear here within this documentation, are attached here under A number 1, and which the witness failed to recognize as his recipes, but which he still managed to come up with in which he testified. under C. He received them in Tuner's pharmacy only after a very determined insistence that Krecmer's prescription be spun for him, and there he recognized a number of such illegal prescriptions on the spot from Krecmer's manuscript. All these animated recipes were intended for embezzlement, and the witness was offered to choose his own among them.
As a conclusion to this whole presentation, I have to state that in this city community it happens that those who are in charge of people's health commit undoubted crimes and frauds, write prescriptions for bad drugs, charge fees that exceed legal amounts and do everything , do damage, damage to reputation and loss of trust in doctors and pharmacists, causing such great damage to their profession and causing hatred towards those who are completely innocent and deal with it.
Therefore, I have decided that medical doctors should make mandatory annual visits to pharmacies and that doctors should generally have constant access to pharmacies, and that careful monitoring should be carried out regarding the correctness of prescriptions and the condition of pharmacies and the validity of medicines, whether simple or complex. compounds.
In case it is noticed that someone is deviating from the right path in this process, he should first be warned as a father, and then, under the threat of much stricter punishments and laws, he should be forced to do his job honorably.
It is, therefore, my opinion that all those who try to commit misdemeanors and frauds in the medical profession should be vigilantly prevented in order to protect patients from excessive payments, harmful and dangerous medicines, and all that with the support and decision of the High Council of Hungary. kingdoms, the reputation of doctors and pharmacists will be preserved and they will be trusted, without any fear of fraud. Certified in Sombor on February 6, 1825.
Chief physician of Backa County
Naredni dokument je na nemačkom
The undersigned, aged 28, of the Catholic faith, before the esteemed commission, in connection with the case of embezzlement of the Jewish surgeon Kretsmer, under oath I declare the following: discovered that just before that - and I saw Kretsmer coming out of the pharmacy - he approached him with a proposal to be his accomplice in writing problematic doctor's prescriptions for which an inappropriate and excessive fee would be paid and on the basis of which both would share the money. Pejak also stated that he did not want to hear about his criminal proposal. On the same occasion, Mr. Jozef Molnar, a city surgeon, was in Pejak's pharmacy, to whom Pejak also presented Krecmer's unheard of proposal in my presence. In Sombor, on January 19, 1825.
Recorder, sworn lawyer of the Kingdom of Hungary at home and abroad
The undersigned, 37 years old, of the Catholic faith, married, a member of the city community and a surgeon, before the esteemed mixed commission, I take the following testimony under oath: Krezmer's malversations: him to the pharmacy, discovered that just before my arrival there was a surgeon Isak Krecmer and that he suggested that he write fake prescriptions in complicity with him and that he send them to his pharmacy without preparation in order to share the two of them in that pharmacy. way of fraudulently gained profits. Pejak also stated that he did not even want to hear about that dishonorable proposal and criminal intentions. On that occasion, Mr. Adalbert Hanke, a lawyer, was also in Pejak's line, and in my presence, Aleksandar Pejak also revealed the mentioned attempt to embezzle the surgeon in question. In Sombor, on January 19, 1825.