A critical inquiry regarding superfætation : with cases / by George Lindsay Bonnar.

  • Bonnar, George Lindsay.
Date:
1865
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: A critical inquiry regarding superfætation : with cases / by George Lindsay Bonnar. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    6/22 (page 6)
    than a third conception of twins. The (proper maturity/ which is an uncertain expression, might very well be possessed by the first¬ born child at the end of, say two hundred and ten days ; and as the other twin was born eighty-one days subsequently, it, as a late born child of two hundred and ninety-one days, would certainly be c perfectly mature/ and the whole case would resolve itself into what has been so often mistaken for superfoetation, namely, a twin preg¬ nancy, one of which (alive or dead) has been born prematurely, and the other some time after.” Now, as the case must stand or fall by the degree of maturity to which the first child had reached, and as the three authorities whom we have quoted, indirectly, and one of them, indeed, avowedly, hang their objections on the want of details in the original history of the case on this very point, and take full advantage of the omis¬ sion, it is obvious that further information obtained from the first source must determine the exact nature of the case in dispute. Ac¬ cordingly, and in consequence of the observations already quoted from Dr Granville’s paper, Dr Paris made personal inquiry of Dr Maton for a further explanation of those particular points on which the merits of the case would seem to turn, and he states, £i the fact is, that both the children were horn perfect, the first, there¬ fore, could not have been a six-months child.” He further states, u Dr Granville seems to have fallen into an important error with respect to the distressing circumstances which attended the delivery.”1 They were not the cause of the labour, as Dr Granville insinuates, but the natural result. The lady could not obtain proper accom¬ modation at the time, although it was not so sudden but that the accoucheur was in attendance, and it was not premature, for it was thought by all that the natural time of utero-gestation had been completed; and Dr Paris concludes by stating, that there cannot exist any good reason for questioning the veracity of the husband, who furnished Dr Maton with all the particular circumstances of the case, nor the justice of the conclusions arrived at. Unless we charge the narrators with dishonesty, and refuse to believe their statements, it must be admitted that this case proves our point. The narrative, however, which has been the principal battle¬ field of the advocates of superfoetation and their opponents, is the following, which we shortly give, in order to notice the objections which have been urged against it by Campbell and Casper. Dr Desgranges,2 of Lyons, says :—u Madame Villard, of Lyons, had married at twenty-two, and live years afterwards became preg¬ nant. She had a miscarriage at seven months, on the 20th May 1779. In about a month thereafter, she conceived again, and on the 20tli January she brought forth a living child. No milk appeared in her breasts, the usual discharge was absent, and the abdomen did not seem to diminish in size. Two surgeons who 1 Paris, Med. Juris., p. 264. 2 Campbell, p. 94; Beck, p. 89; Paris, p. 263; Casper, p. 373.