[Skip to Navigation]
Sign In
April 2, 1892


JAMA. 1892;XVIII(14):431-432. doi:10.1001/jama.1892.02411180023003

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


An apparent victory has recently been won in favor of conservatism in gynecic laparotomy. A trial lasting six weeks has just been concluded in one of our eastern cities, suit having been brought by an alleged woman's hospital against the local newspaper which "showed the thing up." The jury brought in a verdict for the defendant and the judge refused the plaintiff a new trial. This termination was a surprise, for the jury was out a long time, and a disagreement was rendered highly probable by reason of the protracted trial and antagonistic expert medical testimony. The local medical talent, almost without exception, was ranged against the conductors of the hospital, but the latter were enabled to import progressive surgical witnesses from other cities in sufficient force to make an ordinary lay-jury waver and disagree. This very importation of foreign experts may have been injurious to the prosecution, for they

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
Add or change institution