The Evening critic. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1881-1885, 1882-07-14
The Guitsau Autopsy.

Drs. Sewers and Hartigan, who assisted DR..
Lamb In the Guiteau autopsy, have published
their report. They preface 1t with q state
ment Of the difficulty between DR.. Lamb and
themselves, and give narrative OF the circnm.
stances attending tho publication OF DR..
Lambs report, all Of which has heretofore
been published The description OF tho post.
norton condition of tho organs comedies sub.
stantially with that given by DR.. Lamb. The
lungs and heart werc removed by DR.. Lamb
before the brain was examined, and tho sever
ing of the large blood vessels left thai organ
bloodless, which Drs. Sewers and Hartigan re-
gard as an unfortunate mistake. They also
say that DR.. Lamb did not provide himself
with proper appliances for measuring and
weighing tho portions OF tho body subjected to
these tests. In fact, the brain was weighed In
scales belonging to the jail. From the doscrlp-
ton Of the brain glvon In tho report 1t seems
In concluding their report the doctors say:
In tho preparation OF tho above report we
are largely indebted TO the notes of Drs. O. l..
Dana and W. j. Morton, OK New York CITY,. In.
deed these notes were so''full and complete,
and so nearly In accord with our own Views
that In some instances we have adopted them
without change. We are also Indebted to
height weight, and accident ON tho scafrold,
as previously mentioned. In conclusion We
desire 10 state that we were not In accord with
DR.. Lamb in the order adopted by him In tho
making OF the autopsy. We did not object Mt
the moment, for tho reason that II had been
agreed that he Lamb should do the cutting,
liberty TO interpose IN objection at the very
instant of beginning tho work with numberof
gentlemen present by Invitation to witness the
operation. We thought then, and now think,
that tho brain should have first boon opened
and examined, instead OF which the first In
cision made by Lamb was in the region of the
heart, and when the thoracic cavity was laid
open we had no idea that It was the intention
OF the operator TO sever the large vessels
which must necessarily be cut In removing
the heart before tho examination Of the brain
was had. The cutting OF these vessels was
the work OF an instant, and was done before
objection could be interposcd. AS hereinbo-
fore stated, 1t was the severing OF these yes.
sells which caused the drain of blood from tho
brain and left 1t In the anpmic condition 1t
was found when examined.
In certain respectable quarters "the arrange
ments for tho examination Of tho body have
been unfayorably criticised, allusion being
Weighing tho brain were not provided. This
Is true, but tho fault was not ours. DR.. Lamb
having been assigned the work of cutting, and
having, as he claims, been notified several
days before the autopsy that his services
would be required, had undertaken to supply
evorythlf needful for tho complete and scion
tinc performance of the autopsy and when
asked prior to the beginning OF the work
Il eySeryihinnGI was at hand, rePIb, Sa
the brain was taken out and scales were wanted
TO weigh It, mono were at hand and those be-
longing to the iail were brought into requisi-
tion. That the brain has been cut Into pieces
and parts distributed, and this before It's ex-
animation under the microscope, is true 1t
was done without consultation with, or author
i,y from us, and furnishes another Instance OF
what has been apparent all through this pro.
ceeding, viz: the unwarranted assumption OF
authority and responsibility by DR.. Lamb.
Y. It. Sewers, NJ. D.,
J.P.UADTIdAN, NJ. D.,
Majority OF Committee.
DR.. Godding called at tho Medical Museum
this afternoon and had an interview with Dr..
Lamb. Later no won't to DR.. Elliotts onice
and entered into long consultation with him,
doubtless, in regard to the 'autopsy report"
matter. All Of these gentlomon refuse to say
anything at present.