The New York herald., 1879-10-16
FATAL DENTISTRY.

pn. auY MAISrA1Ss THAT AnsENIcAL POISON
ING WAS THE pnEpIsrosING CAUSE OF THE
DEATH on MR. GARDINER
The m dical profession in Brooklyn is still exer-
cised over the controversy regarding the real
of death OF Mr.. Gardiner. who treated by dem
tis in Boston and afterward by dentist in Brook
lyn. Dr. samuel S. Guy. who called to attend
Mr. Gardiner and claims to have detected symptoms
of arsenical poisoning. was waited upon yesterday
by a HERALD reporter and asked what he had to say
new in reference to tho The Doctor complained
that he had been misrepresented in some of the
papers. and he would therefore cheerfuly give his
views and cxfla his connection with the case to
the HERALp.
''You have seen 1t stated" observed the reporter
''that both dentists deny having used arsenic9''
eyes; read that statement. and while know that
Mr.. Marvin denied it squarelv. have yet to learn
that the Boston dentist did over his own sigma
turc. / have not any such denial On the con-
trary. letter written by his brother, prosuin-
ably from his office and by his dctation. in which
he not deny that he used arsenic but says that
he used preparation OF his own which he regarded
as harmless. have also two or three accounts
from protested interviewers which differed IRON,
creosote, and another that he not only
used creosote. but afterward nitrate Of silver.
have no whero positively assumed that the Boston
dentist arsenic, but simply inferred that he
had done from the fact that he treated the tooth
and that it customary among dentists to usc II
in similar cases. have never pretended to know
positively how the arsenic came to be present. but
that it was present have never for . moment
doubted. do not think the symptoms OF the
can be accounted for any othor hypothesis.
From the fact tnAt the patient grew rapidly
and that tho symptoms of arsenicai poisoning de-
velopod within few hours after the stopping was
taken out and the cavity exposed by the Brooklyn
dentist felt that had the right to assume that
arsenic had been used in the treatment
..Could not the Brooklyn dentist have detected
symptoms OF arsencai poisoning?
II don't sec how he could very WELL because. In
tho first place. he admits that the patient was with
time Tor an in that short space. In the
next place he could have detected the sympoms,
even II hs made an examlnssion. TOT TINS m,
into the tooth by the Boston dcntist on 1hursday,
and 1t was taken out on tho following day by tho
Brooklyn dentist. who put in cotton and creo-
soto. Now, the arsenic could not have
been absorbed while 1t was covered up;
that the mischief began The fluids of the mouth
then entered the cavity and the arscnic was thus
washed into the mouth and absorbed. The repeated
handling and treatment the tooth left abrAded
surface, and such surface absorbs very rapidly.
ErFEcTs ARSENIC.
"But II is said the quantity OF arsenic lett after
the stopping was so small that It could certainly not
prove iatalY'
tity absorbed tho circulation has greater effect
than times the quantity taken directly into the
mean the Immediate effect in the latter case This
follows the same principle as hypodermic tnJec-
tions, where small quantities act powerfully.
I'm the cases of absorption you allude TO- II an
topsy wcro made would the condition OF the tntes-
tincs reveal arsenical poisoning?
'Not likely. because the poison would have ex-
pended itself locally. This brings me to the main
Question which has either boen overlooked or mis-
represented, that Mr.. Gardeners was not Of
death by direct crsenical poisoning. The arsenic
only the predisposing cause
"Whst, then was the cause OF death according to
your theoryw
produced gangrene and the absorption OF the gan
grcnous that followed produced sdpticoenia.
which, stated by ma In the certifcate. was tho
poisoning OF the blood. There not sufficient
arsenic absorbed to cause death directly
''Was the case then so virulent within 30 short
time as to defy medical skilY
I'm answer to that would say that Gardiner
himself was greatly to blame for his neglect. was
not called in till four days after the cavity Of the
tooth was uncovered and by'thst time tho poison
had done its work. He lived eleven and half days
from the time first called to him. At my frst
visit the gangrene had rapidly developed. Three
four days there great sloughng in the
throat mouth and right check. took out pieces OF
| decomposed flesh rs largo ss my finger from his
neck and cheek. The sight was horribls and tt was
difficult to remain with him in the room. Ho lay
| his side, SO that the discharge from his mouth
| might not pass into the stomach
'sWhat particular sy ymptoms OF arsenical poisoning
! did you observe in this case p
Nausea, which commenced few bours after
the operation by the last dentist and con-
| tinued at intervals for two days afterward:
great thirst with desire for only small
quantity OF water ut times malsise restessness
and uneasy feeling in the region OF the stomach.
senical poisoning. were present in this case am
prepared to maintain. Moro than this. am quite
theory that the symptoms can, be accounted for
any other hypothesis.'
:You have not detailed all the symptoms of the
case, DoctorT
..No; have not been asked before to give them.
but due time they will be given to tho profession
and the public through the proper channel"