Dr. Bennett continued: Gentlemen of the Association, it was hardly necessary for me to take the stand for the purpose of saying the brief words I was going to say. The paper, as I suggested, was interesting to me, as I had happened to meet a few cases of hour-glass contraction of the uterus. The question of the circular fibres, whether there are or are not, is a question I am not able to discuss, as an anatomical proposition; but the facts are, that the contraction of the uterus in hourglass contraction does not always take place so low, in my judgment, as to be out of reach of the circular fibres as they are declared to exist. Now, within the brief period of four years, I have struck, luckily or unluckily for me, two cases of hour-glass contraction of the uterus wherein the placenta was retained and grasped in the contraction, and was, as stated by the author of the paper, such as to grasp the placenta, not to exclude it, in the upper portion directly in the fundus of the uterus, but to grasp the placenta so that it divided the placenta into two parts, the lower and the upper half, and the contrac. tion involved the placenta about as I have it drafted there[showing diagram.] Now, in one of those cases I had a pupil with me. The patient was rather an idiotic girl or woman about thirty, in our county-house. I was called there to attend her, and sent my pupil. He said there was trouble afoot; he couldn't get the placenta. He sent for me, and I went up there about an hour after the delivery of the foetus. He said the thing stuck; he couldn't get it out. [Laughter.] Consequently I went up there, and supposing we had got a placenta retained from the ordinary cause, I came pretty near making a blunder. I passed my hand up in the usual manner, supposing I had gone around the placenta. I commenced pushing off, but directly I found I was cutting it in two. I found the hourglass contraction of that character I had to go around to get over the sections. I brought my placenta home and exhibited it to members of the profession in the city. Both cases I have spoken of have been of that character. Now that, gentlemen, is all I wish to say on the subject. There is a diagram which represents it very fairly. I have drafted it sitting in my seat. How a contraction can occur there without the circular fibres I am not able to state; but as certainly as twice two are four there was contraction. [Applause.] The motion that the paper be referred to the Publishing Committee was carried. Prof. Donald McLean then read his paper entitled “Clinical Notes on Ovariotomy." Dr. Jerome moved that the paper be referred to the Committee on Publication. Carried. Dr. Alvord-I want to draw attention for a moment only, to the fourth case, I think, of Prof. McLean's, the case he operated on for me; and it is only because it is that class of patients that is commonly left to die that I speak of it at all. At the meeting of the State Medical Society at Battle Creek, two years ago, I asked the opinion of Dr. Pratt, of Kalamazoo, having formerly had the opinion of Prof. Palmer, Dr. Brodie, and of two or three other prominent physicians in the State, describing this case as carefully as I could, as to the propriety of an operation for ovariotomy. Being one of those malignant cases, every one discouraged the operation. The only encouragement I got at all was from Prof. Dunster, and he thought it would be rather doubtful-the propriety of the operation. But after having seen the breasts carefully removed and the excellent recovery that she made, I felt certain, knowing the woman's family history for some time, that although there was this malignant disease at work, and although there was procidentia of a year's standing-constant, I mean, with the uterus externally measuring between six and seven inches, the cavity measuring five and a-half inches, and although she was but little more than a skeleton, there was strong hope. I felt that it was a very possible thing that she might make a recovery. With this view I asked Dr. McLean to come. He came and saw the case, and felt, taking everything into consideration, that there was a strong possibility, if not a fair probability for her recovery. In a few days after the operation was made the procidentia was reduced, that is, within the first two weeks. Now, without any further treatment towards the uterus, the uterus is of normal size. She menstruates, and has since about the second month, regularly. At that time, with an ovarian tumor which weighed about thirty pounds, her entire weight was less than eighty pounds; now she weighs one hundred and sixty-five pounds. Since then I have removed ten malignant growths from the breast and axilla. She has never exhibited any cachectic appearance. Dr. Pratt-How recently was the removal of the last? Dr. Alvord-Week before last. She has never exhibited any cachectic appearance whatever, and has been, since the second month after the removal of the ovarian tumor, which was about two years ago, doing her own work for a family of six children, and as healthy as anybody else. The reason why I draw your attention to it is simply that it be a plea that those women who seem to have gone so very far that there is not much use of treating them, that they have, if it seems at all possible to save them, a fair chance by the removal of the ovarian tumor. The Committee on Admissions then reported favorably upon the application of a number of physicians, who were declared elected by a vote of the Society. Dr. Briggs, Chairman of the Committee, then read the following: In the matter of charges, made by Dr. C. V. Beebe against W. L. Wells, for which his (Well's) application to membership in this Association was, at the last meeting, postponed to this time, we find that the Livingstone County Medical Society, after full examination, exonorated him (the said Wells) from all the charges and specifications. And while we find that there might have been some irregularities in the use of a certain cancer powder, we think it was continued and made the cause of a professional and personal quarrel between the above named parties, which is, in our opinion, reprehensible, and should be discountenanced. And in consideration of the fact that Dr. Wells has discontinued the irregularities, made known the formula, and revealed the “valuable secret" which he intended to hold while he lived, and promises in the future in all things professional to be regular, we would recommend that he, the said Wells, be admitted to membership. THOS. H. BRIGGS, S. S. FRENCH. Dr. Pratt moved that the report be referred to the Judicial Council. Dr. A. B. Palmer, of the University of Michigan, said: It seems to me that the Committee has established the precedent of not going behind the action of local societies. In one case here yesterday of some one who was refused admission to the Detroit Medical Society, without any investigation the candidate was rejected. This seemed to establish the precedent of going according to the decisions of the local societies. Now, let us follow that precedent. I think it a proper one, for we cannot be engaged here with all these minute discussions. If the local society who has examined the case have exonerated him, it seems to me that we should not go back of that. I therefore move that the last resolution which was offered be laid on the table. Dr. Foster Pratt-I hold, Mr. President, that in our State organization it should be the unvarying rule not to receive as members here those who are rejected by the local societies; but I do not believe that the converse of that proposition is just, wise or politic. I do not understand, sir, that we are under any obligations, or that it may always be wise to receive every one that may be acquitted upon charges by a local society, or every one that may be received by a local society. Now, this is a question which properly belongs to the Judicial Council, and I don't propose to express any opinion about it here. It is a matter which, as I think, should have been referred to the Judicial Council by the Committee on Admissions, and it is because I want the action of the Judicial Council upon it that I moved to refer it there. If the Judicial Council shall concur in its recommendation with the Committee on Admissions, we then have nothing further to say about it. Dr. Shank-Will you allow me to ask the Doctor what is his object in referring this matter to the Judicial Council? Dr. Pratt-I am stating it: To have from that council a decision upon any ethical question that may be involved in it, if there is any, and not to create a precedent for discussion of such questions here in this body upon the report of the Committee on Admissions. In the American Medical Association, when charges are made or objections made to persons applying for membership, the objection goes at once to the Judicial Council. The Committee on Admissions have nothing to do with it, and, for one, I don't wish to see such questions come here. We have erected, so to speak, a tomb of the Capulets, into which all those things can be consigned to oblivion, except so far as it chooses to give up, in part, what is committed to its trust. I am in favor of keeping all these questions out of this Society. I think these questions, when raised, should be referred to the Judicial Council, and I move it more for the sake of a precedent than because I have any judgment to express about the merits of the case involved. Dr. Mulheron-It seems to me that this case has come to a vote of the Society without any protest against the action of the Society, and the decision of that local society should be final, so far as this State Society is concerned. If there is any protest here against the action of the Society in acquitting Dr. Wells, it would then be time for the Society to take action. Dr. Beebe-I wish to say, as the person who preferred those charges, that there was a protest offered, and I wish to say further that I have had no chance or opportunity to show this matter up as I might before the Judicial Council. There are other charges to be brought against this man. Dr. Pratt-I merely wish to add to what I have already said, that the constitution reads like this: "All questions of a personal character, including complaints and protests, all questions on credentials shall be referred at once, after the report of the Committee on Admissions or other presentation, to the Judicial Council, and without discussion." [Applause.] The Chair-This will be so referred without discussion, it being a constitutional provision. Dr. Hitchcock's paper upon "A case of Fracture of the Acetabulum, with Dislocation of the Femur," the reading of which had been by resolution deferred beyond the time mentioned in the printed order of business, as reported by the Chairman of the Executive Committee and adopted by the Society, was then called up. By request of its author, the paper was read by Prof. Dunster, of the University. The As the reading developed the fact that the paper contained personal reflections derogatory to several members of the Society, the further reading thereof was objected to. reading was continued, however, until recess, when at 12.30 the Society adjourned. Afternoon Session. The Society convened at 2.30 P. M., and was called to order by Vice President Whelan. Calling of the roll and reading of the minutes were dispensed with. The Secretary stated that if any members had come in who were not present at a previous roll call, and would report their names to him, he would indicate their presence by checking their names on the roll. Dr. Topping moved that the Society take up the fourth order of business, viz.: the election of officers. Carried. Dr. Brodie moved that a committee of five be appointed by the Chair, to nominate all the officers of the Society except President. Carried. The Secretary read the following: In behalf of the Grand Rapids Medical Society, I invite the Michigan State Medical Society to hold its next annual meeting at Grand Rapids. (Signed) CHARLES SHEPARD. |