[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
August 15, 1885


Author Affiliations


JAMA. 1885;V(7):173-177. doi:10.1001/jama.1885.02391060001001b

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.


At a meeting of the Indiana State Medical Society in May, 1882, I read a very short paper on the above subject, in which I cited five cases in support of the position therein assumed, that the deferred operation was preferable to the immediate, and that neither was as frequently required as the profession generally supposed. In consequence of the very unpopular stand I took upon this subject, I was quite surprised, though agreeably, at the favor with which my paper was received by the Society. I must mention, however, one notable exception, a leading gynecologist of Indianapolis, and a prominent member of the Society, who was absent at the time it was read. This gentleman, a year later, while reading a paper on "Laceration of the Cervix Uteri," took occasion to refer to my paper of the previous year, and to express his regret that he was not present

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview