The Queen v. Beaney : extraordinary charge of murder against a medical man, in consequence of a diseased womb being ruptured after death : with medical notes and observations / by C.E. Reeves.
- Reeves, C. E. (Charles Evans), 1828-1880
- Date:
- 1866
Licence: Public Domain Mark
Credit: The Queen v. Beaney : extraordinary charge of murder against a medical man, in consequence of a diseased womb being ruptured after death : with medical notes and observations / by C.E. Reeves. Source: Wellcome Collection.
Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.
227/259 page 215
![A.—The stomach would not have needed to be opened ! Q.—If you saw it to be healthy you would put it aside h A.—[Understood to say “ Yes.”] Q.—In regard to the liver, should not that be examined* ? A.—Yes; cutup. Q.—If the liver were not cut up, the examination would scarcely be complete, I imagine ? A.—No. Q.—In a case like this, where you have the body before you, granting you had seen the rupture to start with, would you pass your arm up 1 A.—No, I don’t think I should. Q.—Would you consider the cause of science better protected by carefully removing the parts and then proceeding to an exami- nation of them rl A,—Certainly. Q.—When you remove a womb from the body, do you cut away the ovaries h A.—No. Q.—Do you attach any importance to them ? A.—Yes. Q.—What is the effect of their absence to your , mind in deter- mining a question of pregnancy ? A.—I think it a very unfortunate circumstance. Q.—You think a person should turn his attention to them where a question of pregnancy is involved 1 A.—Certainly. Q.—With regard to this question with reference to the corpus luteum, what view do you take ? Suppose you were told; that their presence is no proof of pregnancy—is not their absence a presumption against pregnancy ? A.—Yes, very much. I should have expected to have found one ovary larger than the other, containing a well-marked corpus luteum. Q.—You had never any ovary or corpus luteum submitted to you h A. — They appeared to have been cut out after the parts had been removed. [Witness here explained the situation of the ovaries, and stated his opinion to be that the ovaries had been cut out by a “ circular sweep” after the removal of the parts from the body.] Q.—You heard Mr. Rudall state that he could not tell whether they were left in the body or not—do you attach importance to them ? A.—Yes. Q.—You heard Mr. Pugh state that Mr. Rudall should forward them to you h A.—Yes. Q.—Did you ever see the vagina—was it sent to you 1 A.—No ; I received a part of the upper portion of the bladder. hat was in connection with the anterior surface of the womb.](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b22341869_0229.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
