used freely; carried even to the full toleration of the patient. Digitalis is next in value to alcohol and is especially indicated where the pulse is weak and soft, with a low tension. The fluid extract may be given to a child five years old in minim doses, four times a day in the beginning and later, if necessary, with greater frequency. Strychnine is also useful and may be combined with digitalis or given separately, the usual dose being 1-200 of a grain for a child five years old, but may be increased in amount. The erythematous sore throat requires no treatment more than a mild antiseptic gargle. If there is a profuse nasal discharge, nasal syringing with a warm saline or boric acid solution may be used with the hope of preventing infection of the middle ear. The local treatment consists of various mixtures, to be used as sprays or mops, etc. Most all physicians have a preference for different remedies, such as iron and glycerine combined, ichthyol and glycerine, creolin in different strengths, peroxide of hydrogen, and lime water, equal parts, and various other remedies indiscriminately. I have used quite a number, and I am rather inclined to the ichthyol, one drachm to the ounce of glycerine. Gangrenous inflammation of the tonsils or palate is sometimes benefited by injections of 10 per cent solutions of carbolic acid and glycerine, but most such cases prove fatal, no matter what the treatment. During convalescence, tonics, particularly iron and digitalis, are called for. The urine should be examined frequently for a long time after. Antiseptic gargles and a nasal spray should be used as long as a purulent discharge from the nose and pharynx continues. SECTION ON OBSTETRICS AND DISEASES OF CHILDREN. CHAIRMAN'S ADDRESS.-SOME FACTS CONCERNING THE HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE OBSTETRIC ART. J. C. ANDERSON, M. D., For many centuries during the early history of the world we have no knowledge of any assistance being rendered to a woman during parturition. Since the process is a physiological one, and people lived under physiological conditions, there were no causes for the fœtus meeting with obstruction during its passage through the parturient canal. Hence it is hardly necessary to say that children were born into this world before obstetricians were educated to preside over their introduction. If the evolutionist is to be believed, for countless generations the human female brought forth her offspring unaided by science or anything else, save what hereditary experience bestowed equally with her upon the other animals, who were her neighbors. She was strong because natural selection had sent the weak to early graves. The pelvis was large and its bones elastic, because no restricting clothing had been worn. The joints were movable and permitted of a great deal of extension, because the first child was born as soon as possible after puberty, while the tissues of the body still possessed the yielding pliability of youth. The heads of the children were soft and compressible because the diet of the mother consisted of uncooked foods, raw meat, fresh fruits, nuts and roots forming the larger part. Esthetic education makes the human race susceptible to pain. This was not so in early days; the more tenderly people are reared, the more sensitive they become to bodily injuries. We are told that the savages of the Philippine Islands drag themselves along without complaint, just as long as life lasts, though horribly mangled by the shots of the enemy. So, in remote times, the mothers of our race gave birth to their children without complaint, and for the most part without suffering. Natural selection roots out all deformities; no weak offspring can survive to give birth to children in turn. Should malposition of the child hinder labor, unless they are such as the continued efforts of nature might overcome, both mother and child without assistance would be sacrificed. Human life is cheap among savage people. In ancient Mexico it is said that more than 100,000 people were sacrificed to the gods in a single year, and that seldom a year went by that 20,000 or 30,000 did not share the same fate. In the days of the Spanish Inquisition 100,000 persons frequently met death by fire and by torture, in a single year, to satisfy the demands of the sainted fathers of the church. We hear even now of squaws giving birth to their offspring without any of the display that we are familiar with among the civilized. They retire into the forest alone, are delivered without assistance, arise, wash themselves and child in the water of some neighboring brook or pond, wrap the baby in a piece of fur or blanket, and then hurry on to join the rest of the tribe. The ordinary confinement to a bed for an indefinite period of time is omitted. This pre We are familiar with the custom of secluding females, as it is practiced by some Asiatic countries even to this day. vents them from availing themselves of the services of a male physician, and this custom is, I suppose, responsible for the fact that midwives have in most ages had sole charge of the process of birth until the last century or two. We read in sacred history that at the birth of Jacob and Esau, that the hand of Esau came down first, and that the midwife tied a red string around the wrist to show that he was entitled to the birthright, though the body of Jacob came into the world before that of Esau. Later we read of the midwives that attended on the Hebrew women during the Egyptian servitude; how they were not. quick enough to get to the house before the women would have had their children, so that they were unable to comply with the command of Pharaoh to strangle all of the male children which were being born. The same record speaks of confinement stools, which were common in those days. We read in the book of Job concerning abortions and untimely births-children that never saw the light— showing that such things were known at the time the book of Job was written, which is probably the most ancient book extant. The men did not interfere in such cases unless death was inevitable; then they sometimes cut the child in pieces, and tore it away with hooks, an operation which was generally fatal to the mother as well as the child. The fatality was partly due to rough and unskillful handling, and partly to the long delay before they interfered. The ignorance of men concerning the subject of midwifery is shown by an expression of one Dr. Culpepper, in his book on "Obstetrics," published about two hundred years ago. He remarked that he would have known more about the subject if he had ever witnessed a case of confinement. He bewailed the fact that he did not live in Holland, for there it was the custom for wives to be confined on the laps of their husbands, and if such had been the case he might have had plenty of information, as he was the father of twelve children. There are three prominent eras in the science of obstetrics-the invention and use of the forceps by the Chamberlains; the discovery and use of ether and chloroform anesthetics by Martin, Jackson, Simpson and others; and last, but not least, the discovery and advocacy of the germ theory by Lister, Koch and others. The first gives us a means of mechanical assistance, which is of the utmost importance to mother and child; the second makes it possible to perform the mechanical part of the operation in the most skillful manner; while the third reduces to a minimum the mortality of the lying-in period, and more especially where operative interference has been called for. I will devote a few moments to the consideration of the discovery of the obstetric forceps. A crude forceps was used in the twelfth century, but as we are told that the inner surface of the blades were provided with teeth intended to penetrate the head, it was evident that they were only intended for use on dead children. About the year A. D. 1569 there settled in England a Huguenot family by the name of Chamberlain. The head of this family, named William, was a practicing physician. He had two sons, both named Peter, who followed their father's profession. The younger Peter was in continual conflict with his professional brethren. On one occasion he was heard to boast, in an offensive manner, that he and his brother excelled all others in dealing with difficult labor cases. This was in A. D. 1616, and is the first mention of the secret which was supposed to have existed in the Chamberlain family for three generations. Their secret enabled them to grow rich in the practice of their hidden method of treating these cases. Instead of honoring those men for the discovery of one of the most important inventions in medicine, posterity has justly condemned them, that for their own gain they deprived the world of knowledge that might have saved thousands of lives while this secret remained well guarded by the Chamberlain family. The younger Dr. Chamberlain had a son, who was also named Peter, who was a remarkable man. He possessed great, but illdirected, talents. He was an accomplished linguist and an extensive traveler. It is to this man that some have credited the invention of the forceps, but there is no doubt but he inherited the secret from his ancestors. He, in turn, had a son named Hugh, to whom he taught the secret of the forceps. Hugh was extravagant and spent all of his money, and determined to sell the family secret. He went to Paris and offered to sell it there, and to demonstrate the value of his secret attempted to deliver a deformed dwarf at full term, but failed completely, and the woman died with a ruptured |