Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-06-08

ment described by Dr.. Halleck, that OF cleo
trolysis, or galvsno- cautery.
The section had gathered in knots In vari.
GUS parts of the hall to discuss the cssei and
on motion the session adjourned.
SECTION ON STATE MEDICINE.
The section on state medicine re-sssembled
at Workmen's hall, in Odd Fellows block, at
8 o'clock yesterday afternoon, DR.. Gihor in
the chair.
MORTALITY IN THE ARMY.
DR.. Hubbard, to whom was referred the
paper on sickness and mortality in the army,
by DR.. Smith, U. s. A., submitted brief re-
port, showing the sanitary condition OF the
army, as demonstrated by statistics from the
paper.
His abstract Of the paper is as follows:
Nh. OEAIByAN: Surgeon Smith opens his COM
munication with two questions. VIZ:
First-Has state medicine progressed vltnin the
past few years? and
mutton OF disease and deSth.
And he has contributed such answer to his QueB-
lions he found in anaIyi. OF the surgeon gen.
erals reports Of disease and death IL the army from
1871 to 1881, both inclusive, e., eleven years
He presents table of eleven columns, giving the
particulars for each year under the heading of each
column.
The eleventh column gives the mean strength Of
the sruy at 1850; the fourth column gives the sick
rate per year per 1000 at 1888, j. every man IN
the srmy was sick ~ tin es per year. and tue
death rate wss II per lOoO OF mean s'reneth per
year. while the death rate for the sick Was O. per
1,WU. The sickness among the wni'e ana coiofeo
troops was as 1881 OF the former to J 1873 OF
the latter, while deaths were as sEo whites to l0A
ooored
from cases Of sickness distinct from wounds
aud accidents, and the SESSION for beginning the
analysis with the year 1911 ia because thst year g
new method of report wss begun under fresh orders
from the surgeon general
Both the numbers Of asses of disease and desth
vary considerably IN the different year, but the
suthor closes viii this paragraph; "Not adopting.
however, unreservedly any couclusi9ns from the
figures Of this table, may still sag that IS fsr ss
they go, these f2ures seem 10 sh " an advance in
army sanitation and therapeutics in the past ELEVEN
years. Fewer men in proportion are now taken
sick, fever men now die than were taken sick ani
did die Ia eleven years ago."
advise that the paper be not resd but be recon-
pendsd for publication, Respectfully submitted,
JAS. F. BmBARD,
Committee.
EXPERT TESTIMONY.
The meeting then proceeded TO hear some
very interesting remarks by DR.. G. e. Board
man OF st. Paul on the subject OF medical
evidence or the testimony of expert witnesses
In court
In commencing his remarks the doctor
stated that of late years he entered the court
room very reluctantly and with some embar-
easement He believed that testimony known
as expert evidence had very little weight;
that It was sometimes rdiculed By the jury
and often thrown out Expert evidence he
said was first admitted by Lord Mansfield.
The theoretical function OF an expert Wit
ness Appropriated the function OF the jury.
They took his opinion and to some extent it
formed the basis of the verdict. This was
his ideal function: his real function was that
OF an advocate. The expert witness should
be perfectly unprejudiced and honest. The
witness went into court with an ex parte view
OF the case, for the reason that he was only
summoned by one side of the case;
be listened to the testimony and became
biased; his evidence is often prsudiced and
eolored; there were many evils incident to the
position; any one with an NJ. D. TO his name
was considered an expert; there were some
local physicians who were snch only by title.
The speaker alluded to the evils arising from
forensic medical evidence as admitted to the
courts.
In referring to the remedies for the evil the
speaker mentioned the customs of other
countries and latter alludiDg to the various
modes at some length, he thought the suresi
means of obvating the trouble and injustice
that sometimes arose, would be TO adopt q
system which provided that all expert evil
6ence should be given by physicians called by
the court instead of The counsel, as at pres.
ert
This, he thought, would result in bringing
into court witnesses whose minds were I'M
prejudiced and free from bias. In conclusion
he thought that an effort would be made next
winter to introduce the system in the courts
OF Minnesota.
A discussion ensued during which remarks
were made by Drs. Hewitt and Hubbard, who
thought that some system as pointed out by
Dr. Boardman would remove the embArrsss
ment and permit the witness, as summoned
by the court, to appear perfectly untTam-
meled.
Prof. Kedzie thought there was a
broad distinction between questions Eoi
had his falI share of experience
as an expert witness and was heartily tired Of
a syste IN which made the expert tool in
the hands OF politicians and lawyers. He
thought that too dangerous latitude had
been given the matter and hoped that it would
he more strictly guarded by law hereafter
in the opinion that greater protec-
tion should be offered expert witnesses.
He believed that the mind of the average pro-
fessioRsl physician was as free from bias as
that of the average judicial mind, and he dep.
rerated any theory that would place the gen.
eral intelligence en- a lower plane. he believed
1t just as possible for true physician to give
expert testimony in favor Of the side on which
he had not been summoned, II he considered
that the honor of science sGd his profession
were at issue.
DIR. Carmax, of Michigan, thought that
when physician was called into court 1t
should be first ascertained whether he was An
expert or only witness. The speaker alluded
to the fact that men frequently testified who
were not qualified to give expert evidence;
physicians were such only in name. He
thought that physicians should go into court
independent of either side of the
case, with liberty to testify on the
basis of scientific or qualified judgment
He hoped that the time would soon come
when medical experts should be qualified by
the stale, when the matter of giving evidence
In court would be raised above its present low
level.
DR.. Reed, of Ohio, spoke of the many un-
pleasant features attending the appearance in
court OF physicians summoned By one side of
the case to give evidence. He thought that
medical experts should be called by the court
or state.
DR.. Hewitt, OF Minnesois, related his ex-
perie1ce as an expert, being very similar to
that of the other speakers.
DR.. Hubbard offered the following resolu-
tion:
hcSOCccd, lnaI ln6 seetlOn vi sLate neulclut
deems it advisable and more conducive to the
ends of Justice that medical men called as
expert witnesses should be subp9naed directly
by the court instead of as now, 10 be called
by either side.
The subject was further discussed by Drs.
Bracket, OF Iowa, Dr.. Hughes, ST.. Louis,
DR.. Thomas, Georgia, DR.. Van Velsen, Dr..
English, New Jersey and DR.. Catlet, Missouri.
The resolution was adopted ard referred
-. No. xv,fb tho ~ ~
uponit.
a resolution was offered by Medical Direc-
tor A. L. Gihop, o. 8. N, and adopted. re.
euesting the American Medical association
to recommend that congress appropriate the
sum OF $4,000 for the National Mnseum Of
hygiene, which has been established at Wash
ington, by the surgeon general OF the navy.
Adjourned till o'clock to-day, when pa
per will be read by DR.. Hughes, of ST. Louis,
on the HRirhts of the Iussnen