264 On the Re-union of Parts accidentally [Apnit, 
found in the Bibliotheca Chirurgica of Mangetus, vol. i. p. 377. 
Ihave never seen the second. ‘The first is written in so very tedious 
a style, and isso full of repetitions, that I never could find patience 
to read it through. His method appears to have been to supply 
artificial noses to those persons who had lost that organ (a very 
common case in those days) by a quantity of skin cut from the 
fore-arm. His practice does not seem to have had any followers, 
and indeed was soon thrown into ridicule. The verses of Butler 
upon the subject are well known, I presume, to all my readers. 
Garengeot, about the middle of the last century, describes a case 
searcely less extraordinary than those of Tagliacozzi. A person in» 
a quarrel had his nose bit off. It was thrown upon the ground, and 
allowed to remain till it became quite cold. In this state it was 
washed, and applied again to the face. It adhered very speedily, 
and became as entire as at first. This case, which is minutely de- 
scribed by Garengeot, was at first neglected by his contemporaries, 
and afterwards thrown into ridicule. 
The experiments of John Hunter upon fowls were well calcu- 
lated to draw the attention of medical men. He made the spur of 
the cock grow upon his comb, and made the testicles of cocks 
adhere and live upon different parts of the hen. His account of 
transplanting teeth is equally striking. If a tooth be pulled out of 
the head of one person, and fixed'in the jaw of another, it takes 
root, and fixes, and becomes liable to pain and disease precisely 
like other living teeth. Similar experiments were made, likewise, 
i believe, by Duhamel. 
Two facts somewhat similar to the one stated by Garengeot are 
given by Dr. Balfour in the Edinburgh Medical and Surgical 
Journal for October, 1814. 1. About the year 1803 Mr. Gordon, 
at present a surgeon in India, paid a visit to Dr. Balfour, and when 
he went away pulled too the door after him with force. Unfertu- 
nately a little boy, aged about four years and a half, the son of Dr. 
Balfour, who was playing about, had his hand caught within the 
door, and immediately set up a dreadful scream. Mr. Gordon re- 
turned with the boy in his arms, who appeared in a state of torture. 
Three of his fingers had been cut off so completely that their points 
were only attached to the rest of the fingers by a small bit of skin. 
The fore-finger was divided through the middle of the nail, the 
middle finger a little below the nail, and the ring finger at the root 
of the nail itself. The amputation was as neat as if it had been 
made with a sharp instrument ; though at the same time the fingers 
were terribly bruised. Dr. Balfour, shocked that his son should be 
maimed for life, put the extremities of the fingers in their places, 
and with the assistance of Mr. Gordon dressed them, though without 
any hopes of their adhering. But six days after, on taking off the 
bandage, to the inexpressible joy of Mr. Gordon and himself, the 
adhesion was found complete. ‘The skin and the nails of the three 
fingers separated, but were speedily renewed, and the cure was so 
perfect that it required a very minute inspection to find any 
