Truth : a libel by law : the evidence of Sir J.Y. Simpson, bart., M.D., and others, in the case of Sharp versus Wilson, with diagrams and correspondence / by James Wilson.

  • Wilson, James, L.F.P.S.
Date:
1869
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Truth : a libel by law : the evidence of Sir J.Y. Simpson, bart., M.D., and others, in the case of Sharp versus Wilson, with diagrams and correspondence / by James Wilson. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The University of Glasgow Library. The original may be consulted at The University of Glasgow Library.

    74/152 (page 60)
    A loaat I forgot.—bow long slao had been in tbat Crct stage of labour. I could only iciu-a tbat by being told ; sbo was under tbo oaro of a midwife. I just inquired bow long sbe bad boon in labour; and tbo midwife said she bad been there since very early in tbo morning—I think from five o'clock. Tbat was my only source of infor- mation. I liad no other means of satisfying myself that that was the case. Tho midwife is tho principal person on an occasion of the kind. In the case of Mrs Goddes I did not use the catheter. It was not required, because E there was no water in the bladder. I could fed externally if there ivas any qtianlilyrefpiir- irifj the. (ipplimtioii of the catheter. 1 had used before the forceps which I used in this casn. I had no others at that time ; I was only begun in practice. I had succeeded with it in some previous cases. ( Q.) You told us yesterday that the forceps slipped in this case as iisual—what did you mean by tbat? (yl.) I mean by that, that it slipped vinny times—/ could not say the number. When I applied it first it slipped, the second time it slipped, the third time it slipped, and on each attempt, I say, as usual it C slipped. I really could not say what was the position of the child's head in this case, because I did not keep an account of it. It is a vei-y trijlincj matter, and I do not record tho positions; besides, it is twenty-six years ago. (Q.) In this case, as in JIrs Longmore's, you think the position of the bead was immaterial ? (.4.) Yes; it was natural. (Q.) What do you moan by natural? (yl.) The position that is most commonly adopted by Nature in bringing forward a child. (Q.) Which is that posi- tion? (A.) Tliere are fom- positions. (Q.) Which of these four? (.4.) Well, the J) first. ((I) In what diameter of the cavity of the pelvis did the long diameter of the child's head lie? (jd.) At tbat period, immediately before labour, the face wa3 situated in the holloio of the sacrum—tbat is, in the longest diameter of the outlet of the pelvis. I always iiso Hamilton's forceps. In this case it was the common short forceps. I introduced my forceps in the axes of the pelvis—not of the outlet of tbo pelvis. I felt the ear of tbo child before I introduced the forceps ; that is the part to be seized upon. The head remained resting on the perineiun for a good many E hours, I do not now recollect how many. I was called there, I think, in the fore- noon ; I visited again about three o'clock, and again about seven o'clock, if I recollect aright, and the bead made no progress during aU that time. That would probably be for six or eight hours. There was no constitutional irritation, otherwise I would have applied the instruments much earlier. The reason why I applied the forceps at all was because the head was impacted in tho pelvis. I did not apply the forceps antero-posteriorly; I applied them laterally. (Q.) As to Mrs JIair's case, do you F consider it safe to rely upon the statement of a patient as to the state of her own bladder? (A.) I always examine for myself. I ask the patient, and then examine for myself. If there be such a quantity of water in the bladder as would render the application of instruments dangerous, it can be detected by the hand. It is very seldom I try the catheter imless I cannot detect it; and I very seldom find myself err in tbat respect: I nevej: found my diagnosis of tbat state of matters to be incorrect. Mrs Mair's pelvis was contracted at the brim. It was not contracted at the outlet, so G far as I am aware. I ascertained its contraction by tactile examination—that is, by touch with tho fingers; after putting the person under chloroform, I can do it freely. I put her always under chlorofoi-m when I am about to attempt to apply the forceps. (CI.) Where was the child's headvrhcn you performed craniotomy? (A.) The pelvis of tho mother was conti-acted antero-posteriorly to the extent of three inches, so far as I could ascertain. I tried with pretty powerful traction to extract tbo body of tho child, but when it came to the head I found that the head was so much ossified II that it stuck there at the brim of the pelvis. It yielded so far, but not enough to allow it to be extracted. It was at the brim it was detained. (Q.) How long bad tho bead been impacted at the brim? (A.) The midwife in attendance was such a person that I could not depend upon her word for an instant, and therefore I could not say positively. Immediately on arriving there / found the head impacted at the brim of the pelvis but bow long it had been so previously I could not say. It must have been BO for aomo considerable time, bocauso there was very considerable constitutional I irritation. What I mean by being much ossified is, that tbcro is a much g';<?at<T a much stronger deposition of osseous matter in the bonos of tho cramum of the child than usual. When a bone is very strongly ossified, it is very resisting to any mslru-