BONES IN COURT.

Mount Ida Chronicle, Volume V, Issue 261, 7 March 1874, Page 3

BONES IN COURT.

The ease of Hum v Sorley was con— - eluded in the Resident Magistrate's Court' this week, and-resulted in a verdict fbrthe plaintiff for £IOO and costs. Corisr-'-derable interest was excited during the hearing of* the case; and all the medical .■ men and apothecaries in town appeared to - be present The , medical witnesses in their evidence dragged in every technical word they could lay their tongites to in re- - lation to,the human leg and foot At i length the Resident Magistrate had to. call : the attention of the counsel and witnesses to. the fact that, however conversant theymight be with the terms employed, the Bench -had. not been brought up. • to the study of medicine,.and that if. these - various terms were to be written, correctly > / it would be as well, when a particularly; hard one was mentioned, thatiit should spelt for the information of the Bench,. - and others not learned in, the laws of surgery and physic, Our reporter, on, being asked to write a "local""' on thesubject, favored us with, tha- following lucid statement, .-which he-says-is strictly in accordance -with the medical testimony. We have-no. doubt he- is-, right, and we give it to our readers- as-.hetgave it to us : " The-diagnosis'of this interesting case was. thoroughly apparent to all in Court. It seeW that „the plaintiff had* sufferecrk from a.fracture of the tibia,. and, it waa, also said, the fibula; but an enlargement.of the dislocation had led to a circumferential displacement of the malleolus, which, causing a filtration of the. tissues, led to a strum us of the crepitus. The serum of the periosteum caused the oedema astragalus to. lead to an undue calitis, a determination of blood, -and a scrofulous er'up tion, the.whole of which resulted in a harvest for the lawyers, a field-day for the medical profession, a knotty question torthe Bonch, and a verdict,for the plaintiff." Our reporter says the above description of" the leading facts of the case must be perfectly intelligible" to any man of ordinary common sense. We * therefore give jt for what it is worth, although we are greatly afraid that the writer must have been, somewhat confused when he penned it. .Among other articles brought into Court for . the purposes of reference, were two legbones and a skeleton foot, which werehandled by the medical 'witnesses in quite an affectionate - mariner. The gentlemantaking notes for this-journal expressed-a desire to his v brother reporter to know more of these bones—whose- they were, and - whence they came--as. it strutTc him they might prove the grouhdwoik uf an\ excel- . lent article on the human anatomy- His friend replied to himj "Be easy : where ignorance is bliss,'' 'tis folly to be wise ;"- and added, " who knows but that we may some flay see your bones gracing a Court of law, as evidence in a-case to test a reporter's strength. of mind?" Upon this, our reporter anl, to change" ! * the.subject; "at once invited his friend to, take a'/dnnk--the result of which we should imagine to be the present local. The judgment - was frr the plaintiff fur £IOO, and costs.—' Otag'» Guardian-'