Volume 2

Taylor's principles and practice of medical jurisprudence / [Alfred Swaine Taylor].

  • Taylor, Alfred Swaine, 1806-1880.
Date:
1920
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Taylor's principles and practice of medical jurisprudence / [Alfred Swaine Taylor]. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    18/984 (page 6)
    the death of the husband, the widow married the defendant, the alleged adulterer, and had by him four children ; but for eight years preceding the death of her first husband this woman had borne no child, and it was only when her intimacy with the alleged adulterer commenced, and during her husband’s illness, that she became pregnant. The question submitted to Carpenter and the author on this state of facts was—Was it possible or probable that the husband could have begotten the child in the diseased condition in which he was repre¬ sented to have been at the date of conception ? The opinion given was that it was possible, because there was opportunity of access ; and sexual power, if lost by the attack of paralysis, might have re¬ turned at a time corresponding to this date ; but they considered it to be in the highest degree improbable. It was alleged that diseases of this kind tended to suspend sexual power, that in this particular instance the effect would be aggravated by the intemperate habits of the husband, and the general exhaustion and debility under which he was proved to be labouring. Further, the non-procreation of children dur¬ ing the eight years that he was married and in constant habits of inter¬ course with his wife was clearly not owing to sterility or incapacity on her part, because she had borne children after her marriage with the defend¬ ant : it could, therefore, in their opinion, be assigned only to impotency or incapacity in her first husband. The general conclusion which they drew from the facts laid before them was that the husband at the time was impotent, [? sterile—Ed.], and incapable of begetting a child. Evidence to this effect was given by them in the inquiry subsequently directed by the Vice-Chancellor. At the same time, they did not feel justified in asserting that prolific intercourse on the part of the husband was actually impossible. Guy and Semple gave evidence on the part of the defendants, to the effect that there was no proof of impotency in the husband, and that a man labouring under such an illness as that from which he was stated to have suffered would still be physically capable of procreating children. The evidence regarding the precise bodily condition of the husband about the date of conception was conflicting ; and the Vice-Chancellor decided in favour of the defend¬ ants, that the child was the child of the husband, and was entitled to the estate which the plaintiffs, the heirs of the husband, sought to recover from the defendant and the widow who had married him. There was no evidence from parental likeness, for the child through whom the claim arose had died some time before proceedings were taken. The legal presumption of legitimacy by wedlock and possible access was too strong to be rebutted by medical opinions. [I think a different verdict would now be given.—Ed.] It is very rare, if not unknown, for these affections of the spinal cord to have an effect upon the testicles, but should they do so and cause also motor paralysis, there can be no doubt of impotency ; but Curling quotes a case from a foreign writer, in which, under paralysis (paraplegia) of some years’ duration, a man retained sufficient sexual power to have prolific intercourse. When the paralytic person is advanced in age, it is highly probable that he is impotent. In 1857