St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1893-03-09
Doctors Of Opposing Schools
View the Clayton Case
Differently.
Some Rather Surprising TeS-
timony Brought Out by
the Lawyers.
Homeopathic Physicians, on
Cross-Examination, Mix
Things,
While the Allopaths Smile
Derisively--A Finish Pos
sible Today.

The testimony in the DR.. Pearce trial
yesterday was very Interesting, not
withstanding the fact that 1t was prin-
cipally of a technical character. Home
opathlc physicians were called by the
defense, and the result was contest of
rather acrimonious character between
the regular school of physicians ard
that of the homeopathy. The latter
united in cOndemuing the practice of
the former, as represented by the ia
nous DR.. Park Richie, DR.. Davis, DIR.
Ohage and DR.. Charles A. Wheaton.
Drs. Tobey and Eigbee, who are con-
nected with &c homeopathic school IN
Minneapolis. declared that they did not
regard the treatment of Mrs. Clayton by
DR.. Davis as proper. 1t will be remem-
bered that Drs. Richie, Ohage and
the treatment by DIR. Davis was right
and proper in every particular. 1t IS
singular thing that both DR.. Tobey and
DR.. Iligbee testified that the mlScar-
riage had occurred before the operation
of DR.. Pearce, and both made the state
ment on a hypothetical question as TO
what time after the operation the
embryo was discharged. They both
corrected their statements when atten-
ton was specifically called to the fact
that the evidence showed that preg-
nancy existed at the time that DR..
Pearce performed the operation. They
both testified that the condition of the
overles at the pOSt-mOrtem showed that
the woman was not pregnant, and both
got badly mixed on crosS-eXaminatlon.
They both were charged by the county
attorney with evasive answering. Every
time hypothetical question was put to
them by counsel on either side they in
variably asked that the question be re-
peated. The court room was packed,
and the interest was very great during
1 the entire day.
Both DR.. Tobey and DR.. Higbee testi
fed that there were no symptoms of
blood poisoning and that the other doc
tors were mistaken when they testified
that there had been Septicaemia. They
both testified that Mrs. Clayton had died
from succession of shocks, and DIR.
Higbee was quite facetious in giving his
opinion as TO the number and nature of
the shocks to which the woman was sub
jected 1t was declared that these
shocks caused collapse or heart failure.
Both of these physicians also declared
that it was impossible to tell the cause
OF the death of Mrs. Clayton.
Created a Sensation.
DR.. Tobey was subjected to rigid
croSS-eXamlnation by the county attor-
ney, and when repeatedly pressed to
state ii he was to be understood as say
Af,.,N NlN.N EhA nnd
death or was the probable cause, he de-
clared he would not answer unless COM
PEELED to do so. Judge Kelly stated that
he would be required to answer. DR..
Tobey then hesitated considerably and
declared that he did not want to assail
DR.. Davis and finally wound up by say
ing that the treatment by DR.. Davis
probably caused the death. This created
profound sensation in the court room.
Dr.. Richie looked rather severely
around, and DR.. Davis smiled in deris-
ION. DR.. TODey corrected himself by
stating that he would not say that the
treatment was the probable cause of
death, but that it was a possible cause.
The same physician stated that the use
of morphine and the duOches. as we'll as
the use of the curette, produced shocks
that contributed to the death. During
the cross-eXamination of DR.. Tobey, as
we'll as DR.. Higbee, by the county at
tOrney, the defense interposed several
objections that were not sustained by
the court The nature of these cross
examinations was to show prejudice
and that the physicians belonged to the
same school as DR.. Pearce.
A Succession of Shocks.
DR.. G. G. Higbee testified that he
makes a speciality of diseases of women.
He believes that the embraSure might
have been caused by the curette, but
not by the catheter. Upon a long by
political question being asked, DR.. Hig-
bee expressed the opinion that the death
of Helen Clayton was caused by col
lapse induced by succession of shocks
produced upon her. He believed the
embryo, or fOetuS. was discharged before
the catheter was introduced. He saw no
evidence of septic3mia. In examining
the oyaries at tie post mortem he found
an indication that Mrs. Clayton was not
pregnant. He said that he could not
say there was not septic9mla. The use
of the curette on Sunday was improper
from the Standpoint Of the witness.
The counsel on each side took sew
eral turns at asking questions of DR..
Higbee, which the court finally stopped
with the observation that the witness
had gone over the ground and answered
both ways to the different counsel.
1t was nearly o'clock when court adj
iourned until this morning. 1t is eX-
pected that the state will begin with re-
butting testimony during the day, and
the case may go to the jury this evening.