300 NATURAL EUTOCIA. 



MM. Gardien, Dubois, Flamant, Dewees, and Desormeaux, as well 

 as Madame Boivin, have continued to describe it, at the same time 

 admitting it to be very rare. In fact, out of twenty thousand five 

 hundred and seventeen children, six only were found to present in this 

 manner. MM. Maygrier, Capuron and Duges have argued against 

 the possibility of its occurrence, and Madame Lachapelle affirms 

 that she never observed one single instance of it in more than 

 thirty-six thousand labors. 



The question therefore is, whether it is proper to retain it in a 

 regular classification. The labors and researches of the moderns 

 are almost the only ones that can be usefully consulted for the pur- 

 pose of deciding upon this point; for as Baudelocque found no ob- 

 jections that he thought it worth while to combat, he neglected to cite 

 any particular facts for the purpose of demonstrating the possibility 

 of its occurrence. It is objected by MM. Maygrier and Capuron, 

 that the forehead, being a solid and round part, cannot maintain itself 

 in front of the sacro-vertebral angle during the expulsive contrac- 

 tions of the womb; that two round and equally salient bodies cannot 

 slide upon each other without turning off to the right or left; in one 

 word, that previously to the close of pregnancy, or at least at the 

 very commencement of labor, the forehead of the foetus is neces- 

 sarily repelled by the promontory towards one of the sacro-iliac 

 symphyses. 



738. Without denying the force of these objections, I may, not- 

 withstanding, be permitted to observe, that in the recent pelvis the 

 sacro-iliac hollow is to a great degree effaced by the psoas muscles 

 and iliac vessels; that the vertebral projection is thus considerably 

 diminished; that the entrance to the excavation is then not so large 

 behind as it is in front (72); that the womb being directed in con- 

 formity with the axis of the superior strait, rather than with the axis 

 of the spine, and the head of the child habitually bent upon its breast, 

 the forehead, at the commencement of labor, ought to correspond 

 to the anterior surface of the first piece of the sacrum, and not to 

 the sacro-lumbar projection, properly so called; and therefore that 

 it does not seem impossible for the head to descend in a direct posi- 

 tion. I add, with M. Desormeaux, that authors have reasoned upon 

 this case as if the pelvis were always the same, always regular. 

 Where the vertebral angle is but slightly expressed, or thrown back, 

 the sacro-pubic diameter is sometimes longer than common, without 

 the cavity of the pelvis being really vitiated; in such a case the third 

 position, far from being impossible, should, on the contrary, be the 

 most natural and the easiest, inasmuch as the head, in engaging, 

 always strives to place the great diameter of the circumference that 



