Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1914-10-21

calls IL his orders were not to be car
ried out. AT this time, said the doc
tor. the leg showed a shortening ~
two inches by measurement
This completed the direct examin.
alton which had been conducted By
Mr. Littiefield Mr. Heselton immedi-
ately entered upon his cross exam
nation.
In response to Mr.. Heselton's ques-
lions the witness stated that there
We're several methods of treating a
fractured femur, and somewhat of a
history as well as description of the
Bucks extension followed.
The witness agreed that a modification
of the Bucks extension was best in
some cases. A possible treatment of the
case in question, the witness admitted.
would have been the use of coaptation
splfnts. In response to questions the wit
mess said that he had not employed
splints on one side of the leg because
such thing would not have allowed the
dressing of the burn. discussion OF the
burn followed in which the doctor out
lined possible other ways of treating the
burn.
In regard to his treatment for reducin
the fracture the witness was asked If
ether were not the best anesthetie, to
which he replied that it was not necessa-
rlly in all cases. He agreed that there
were no unordinary complications except
the burn. The question of the removal of
weights from the Bucks extension occu-
pied some time, and was followed by
discussing the shortening of the leg
In answer to Mr.. Heseltons questions
the witness stated that he did not tell
Mr.. Merrill he would be a cripple He
was asked what he would call such a
shortening of the leg, 10 which he re-
piled, favorable result for a fracture of
the femur.
The witness was asked if he remember
ed going to the house and meeting them
with the inquiry what in hell do you
want now?" He said he did not He
was asked If he knew of no other and
better method in surgery for treating the
case, to which he answered that he could
devise none under the circumstances.
Here the court enjoyed a short recess
AT Hip the witness resumed his place on
the stand and the cross-examination was
continued.
A discussion of the double inclined
plane. which was employed in place of
the Bucks extension after the re-setting
by Drs Odiorne and Simons. took place
The witness was asked why he had not
employed it in the first place He replied
that he had been successful in his use OF
Bucks extension. He admitted he was
familiar with the other method. And
yet" Mr.. Heselton said, you neglected
to use it,
The topic of medical assistance upon
the case was brought up and the witness
was asked if he remembered telling Mr.
Merrill that he might go to the hospital
or go to the devil" Yes" he replied,
Il think 1 finally did--on sufficient prov
ocation.''
A discussion of the suffering of the pa
tient and of the shortening of the in
jured limb closed with the attorneys
question: 80 you were fully aware the
leg was shortening while in attendance?"
Il was" replied the witness.
A short redirect examination and a
short re-cross-examination were conduct
ed by the opposing attorneys. Four other
witnesses We're heard before court adj
journed in Il. 30 until the afternoon ses-
sion. 4>
The afternoon session opened at
o'clock and the testimony for the defence
was continued. Many witnesses took the
stand and testified in regard TO the ve-
rious points in dispute between the two
sides Several doctors testified concern
ing the treatment which DR.. Odiorne had
given Mr. Merrill. In direct examina-
ton they all stated that il had been in
accord with universally accepted methods
of good surgery and was in good use in
the treatment of the case in question All
were subject to the searching cross
questions of Mr.. Heselton. which were
very forceful and thorough
The rebuttal by the counsel for the
plaintiff was opened shortly after
O'Clock and continued until the dismissal
of the jurors a 5.45 Court was not adj
journed at this time owing to other mat
tiers of business, but the trial was sus-
pended until $50 this morning.