Illustrations of medical evidence and trial by jury in Scotland.

Date:
1855
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Illustrations of medical evidence and trial by jury in Scotland. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    35/66 (page 33)
    I cases. Dr Dobie was house-surgeon in March 1853. My atten¬ tion was called to the case of a boy, Patrick Clark, in that month. My attention was first called to it on the 20th of March. The boy had been in the Infirmary two or three days before I saw him. There was an extensive lacerated wound on the outer side of the left leg, with a compound fracture of the tibia, or inner bone of the leg, a little above the ankle. By introducing my finger into the wound, I ascertained the situation and existence of the fracture. The lacerated wound was on the outer side, and it wend round to¬ wards the inner side, and then it penetrated to the bone, which was broken. It is difficult to say what may not be visible in a wound, but to introduce my finger was the easiest and readiest mode of ascertaining; and the customary mode I may also say. The ex¬ amination of the outer side would not show it at all. The fracture was of the tibia. The fibula wns not broken. That completely alters the complexion of the case from one in which both bones are broken. The injury is of a different nature when one bone is pre¬ served, in respect to what we call the prognosis or the prediction of consequences. Because it prevents motion of the broken bone; it I prevents the bones from being drawn past each other, and causing irritation. The Lord Justice-Clerk.-—Of what?—The preservation of the fibula keeps the bones of their due length, and preserves them in their place, which would not be the case if both were broken. By Mr Patton.—It was a compound fracture; that is, a fracture in connection with an outer wound. It is a matter of material difference in the aspect of a case of that description, whether the fracture is simple or compound. Compound fractures are more serious than simple fractures. I examined the boy on the 20th, and I directed his limb to be dressed and placed in a particular way. It was not dressed in the way usual in compound fractures. May I be permitted to explain ? The Lord Justice-Clerk.—Mr Patton, this may be excessively instructive and very valuable both to us and to the people in court, but I do not see the object of it on this occasion. Mr Patton.—I shall explain it. The Lord Justice-Clerk.—Well, withdraw the witness. [Witness withdrawn.] Mr Patton.—My lord, I propose to prove particularly the nature of this injury; I propose to prove the condition of the patient, and