RETENTION OF THE FCETUS. 
17 
ties opening into it) and was attached anteriorly to the diaphragm, 
and laterally to the abdomen, for several inches around in every di¬ 
rection, and contained the remains of a fine foetus, now reduced, 
in a great measure, merely to bones and a little putrid matter, &c. 
The sac thus formed by a part of the uterus was, inside, in an 
apparently diseased state, being necessarily of a darkish colour, 
in consequence of the uterus firmly grasping the bones, and 
injured by their rough projections, as it was completely wedged 
' full. The remainder of its coats were sound, and not much thick¬ 
ened. There were attachments pretty freely formed on its outer or 
peritoneal coat with the small intestines and thin mesentery, 
but they were sound. All other parts were sound ; and she 
weighed 16fb a quarter, and was very tolerable meat. 
Observations .—This ewe ought to have yeaned two years ago, 
the beginning of last year, as it was well knowm by the owner 
that she was in lamb, that her time was up, and that he saw 
her uneasy as for yeaning; and he says he has no doubt that 
if he had gone to her assistance she would have yeaned. 
Such cases are curious, and shew us more strongly what we 
are continually seeing—the great efforts nature sometimes makes 
to get rid of anything that is injurious. 
If I had laid wider open the orifice, I should have easily extracted 
the foetus at once, and there would not have been the least dan¬ 
ger, as the abdominal cavity would have been avoided. 
Was the contracted state of the portion of the neck, &c. of the 
uterus existing at the full period of utero-gestation ? If so, she 
would have been disabled from yeaning ; or was it in consequence 
of the union formed with the diaphragm and abdomen, and 
thus leaving it upon the stretch, the expulsive action of the uterus 
havino^ subsided ? 
c* • • • • 
It may not, perhaps, be uninteresting to insert the following, 
on the subject of extra-uterine fcetation, as it bears strongly 
thereon :— 
C\®:SAREAN OPERATION FOR THE REMOVAL OF A FO-ITUS, 
FOURTEEN MONTHS AFTER CONCEPTION. 
In the volume of The Lancet for 1835 and 1836, vol. 1st, is a 
case of the above description, related by a Mr. Hutchinson to 
the London Medical Society. “ The foetus was as large as an 
ordinary foetus at the full time of utero-gestation, and the cuti¬ 
cle was entire, except over the scalp.In the discussion on the 
case, in the following number. Dr. Ramsbottom (who was called 
in to the case) observes (see his corrected speech, page 266), 
“ that he was only acquainted with five cases reported in our 
language, in which an extra-uterine foetus had been extracted by 
VOL. XI. I) 
