The Ely miner. [volume] (Ely, Minn.) 1895-1986, 1939-09-14


can, Amerigo Vespucci Society, and
Amerigo Vespucci Consorelle. August
Trenie is acting as chairman of the
arrangements committee
way silicotic nodule may be differen-
tiated from a tubercular nodule is that.
the silicotic nodule is more discreet, as
they call it, or more sharply defined
than the tubercular nodule, and yet in
the record we find reference to
diagnosis referring to "DiScrete nothing
or streaking which may be due to pneu-
moconiosis although this IS not de-
finite" 1t is admitted by the experts
who testified for the plaintiff that
other conditions in the lungs would
produce discrete, sharply defined no
dulles similar to those found in silicosis
the ends of blood vessels being one of
the things. 1t is also claimed that
other conditions may produce similar
discrete, sharply defined modules.
DR.. Clement, who is an expert on
radiology and who confines his prac-
tice exclusively to that, testified, that
syphilis in the lungs will produce the
same kind of sharply defined, discrete
nodules as is produced by silicosis.
Considering the whole record, am of
the opinion that the plaintiff has
wholly failed to sustain by the burden
which is required of him that he has
silicoSis, and that the testimony of the
doctors who appeared on the part of
the defendant to the effect that he has
just plain case of far-advanced pull
monary tuberculosis aggravated by his
syphilitic condition has been eStab-
lished by an overwhelming preponder-
ance of the evidence. This is strength
ened when in view of the fact in asking
DR.. Hedberg about his opinion, plain
tiff's counsel included in his hypo-
thetical question the assumption that
the plaintiff was in good health until
the fall or summer of 1885, when he de-
veloped cough, ShortneSS of breath
and began feeling weaker That he was
in good health in the summer or fall
of 1888, when tn evidence shows that
in January of that year his syphilitic
infection had gone to the extent of
involving the spinal cord so that the
gastric crisis which he then suffered
resulted therefrom, seems to be quite
impossible. 1t looks like a gradual
growing worse of his syphilitic infec-
ton and his tubercular condition until
he was finally disabled. The gastric
crisis occurred in January, 1888 In the
early part of 1885 his syphilitic infec-
ton had progressed to the extent that
he suffered the bulbar palsy and the
Argyll-Robertson eye, and it still per-
sists. He was treated at the sanatorium
for it for considerably over year, and
his blood tests still show Kline four
plus, which some of the doctors say
does not mean anything, but others
and think with good reason, say means
his syphilis is still active.
The testimony of Dr. Hedberg, who
was the principal expert for the plain
tiff, is also greatly weakened by the
Icopy of the letter that he wrote Mr.
Wangensteen, and which was not in the
file of the sanatorium at the time that
the file was produced, wherein the doc
tor practically gives it as his opinion
that the plaintiffs tubercular and syph-
little condition would cause his total
disability regardless of whether or not
he had silicosis.
Included in the hypothetical question
given to the doctors it was also the
assumption that they would take the
history of the patient Ghe plaintiff)
into consideration in determining what
their answers should be- In doing so
they necessarily relied upon the truth
fitness of the history. That the his
tory as given by him could not be re-
lied on is evidenced by the fact that
he lied to his own doctors about his
syphilitic condition until the absolute
proof thereof developed.
DR.. Hedberg admits that it is diff
cult to say which nodule denotes sill
COSTS or which denotes tuberculosis.
Taking the testimony as a whole, I
feel that the evidence fails to establish
by preponderance that the plaintiff
is suffering of silicosis, and that the
claim of the defendant that he is suf-
fering only of an advanced stage of
tuberculosis complicated by syphilis is
the more reasonable conclusion to be
drawn therefrom. 1t is not disputed
that his tuberculosis is very extensive;
it invaded his tonsils, so that they had
to be removed, and has also invaded the
intestines, both the small and the large.
His condition now may be hopeless, but
the evidence fails to establish that the
defendant is in any way responsible
therefor.
The evidence also leaves in doubt as
to where he contracted Silicosis, if he
has it. His employment was such that
under the testimony he might as well
have contracted it while working in
the rock in the Zimmerman mine in
Michigan or in the Section 80 mine at
Ely as while working for the defen-
dant. OF course, the defendant would
not be responsible for any silicosis that
the plaintiff contracted while working