The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1895-02-09

several years old, and much progress
had been made since it was published.
He had consulted the work in the pres
emit analysis, but had not been governed
by it
DIR. JOHN F. THOMPSON,
physician and surgeon of this city, sur
geon at the Maine General Hospital and
Professor of..the Diseases sof Women at
the Medical School of Maine, was next
called. He had performed the autopsy
lon the body of Mary B. Dunn, and now
described infinitely the details and re-
sults of that autopsy. He was positive
| that the autopsy showed death to have
| resulted from septic peritonitis, and in
bissopinion this was induced by an abor-
ton.
DR.. Thompson then produced a series
OF charts and delivered very interesting
and instructive medical lecture for the
benefit Of the jury. Dr.. Hughes
also seemed to take an interest
in the information impaired.
DR.. Thompson, the lecture being fin
,shed, took the stand again. He had
heard the testimony Of Professor Robin
son, and knew OF the nature of ergot
pills. By the regular profession the
pills were used to remedy certain irreg-
| ularities. OF their use in abortion cases
he had no knowledge, but from their
nature it was evident that they would be
used to assist in the process.
Coming to uraemia, DR.. Thompson said
he knew of no such disease. Uraemia
was a symptom of other diseases. Urae-
mic poisoning was known by these symp-
toms: Ealry and intense headache Sc
we're vomiting, tendency to stupor, and
then condition of deep sleep, and, if
long continued, commissions.
Uraemic poisoning contributed to the
death of Mary Dunn, but it was second
any, and the discoloration of the skin
was due to another cause.
The witness gave his opinion that the
poisoning which produced Mary Dunn's
ion of poisonous instrument into he
organ where the trouble arose.
After DR.. Thoplpson's unusually clear
and instructive direct examination, the
cross questioning began.
Judge Symonds asked whether, so far
as the things seen at the autopsy were
concerned, there was anything to indi-
rate that the abortion might not have
cesulted from natural causes.
The witness thought there were things
to indicate that the abortion was not
the result of natural causes. If he had
seemed to state otherwise at former
hearing, it was from different concep-
lions of the meaning of the questions.
Judge Symonds asked II the dlscOlora-
ton of the 4 kin was not such as might
result from uraemic poisoning.
Witness replied that it was not. There
was no distinctive color for uIaemic
poison. In case of acute Bright's dis
ease there is no distinctive coloring. In
the chronic Bright's disease there is Oft
en- coIoring of the surface of the body
due to the disease. In Mary Dunn's
case the discoloration was caused by
stoppage of the flow of bile from the liv-
err The kidneys we're, in this case, also
incapable of performing their functions,
| being much congested.
! Could you say how long they had been
| incapable of performing their functions.
| / could not.
If they had begun to be entirely con-
| oested Sunday, would they have pro-
| duced death by Wednesday?
| The witness replied that they would
probably not have done so.
| If the kidneys had entirely ceased ac-
| ion Sunday might not she have died of
uraemia Wednesday noon?
| She might, il other means of eliminat-
| ing the poison should net be used.
| Judge Symonds asked it the uraenla
| may not have been primary in the order
| of cause and the peritonitls secondary.
| Dr.Thompson thought this was not
so, although the uraemia might have
been primary in order OF time. But
| witness would not admit that in this
case the uraem1a caused tue perltonitls.
although counsel for defence dwelt long
upon his theory.
| A suppurative Inflammation In the
affected organ, had, in witnesses opin-
| ion, caused the uraemia and the portion
| tits.
| Witness was asked if abortion some.
times followed acute inflammation of the
kidneys, and said that it did.
| Nov, doctor, can you fairly deny to
| this jury, as a professional man, the
| fair possibility that an abortion in this
| case may have resulted from acute
| Rright's disease or Inflammation of the
| kidneys?n asked Judge Symonds.
II deny in this case the fair posi- bili-
tyr SAID DR.. Thompson, "pecuse there
was an evidence of another cause"
"But the evidence of that other cause
does not constitute denial of this pos
siiblity, does it?"
| Witness continued very positively that
inflammation of the kidneys was not the
cause of Mary Dunn's death.
Judge Symonds then went on to the
subject of the pills. Witness said they
rather astringent, and were not such as
would of themselves produce an abor-
| Jion.
Returning to the subject of septic
poisoning. Judge Symonds secured from
the witness the admission that digital
examination might, unless the hand was
thoroughly sterilized, introduce septic
poisoning.
Vhe examination of DR.. Thompson was
closed soon after this point, and the
court adjourned until 10 a. m. Saturday.
NOTES.
The attendance is growing larger, but
still continues to be confined almost en-
tirely to men, Mrs. Hughes and her two
daughters being the only women pres
emit.
Fridays proceedings were confined
largely to medical and chemical sub
jects, the testimony dealing largely with
| technical matters.
Professors Carmichael and Robinson
are old associates at Bowdoin, and there
was considerable interest when they
we're pitted against one another. Pro-
fessor Robinson as witness, and Pro-
lessor Carmichael az adviser of Judge
Symonds, as be conducted the examin-
alton into the nature of the drug ergot.
Ergotine, which comes from ergot,
is also spelled ergotin." The latter