"Such devils would pull angels out of heaven,
Provided they could reach them; 'tis their pride;
And that's the odds 'twixt soul and body-plague!
The veriest slave who drops in Cairo's street,
Cries, 'Stand off from me,' to the passengers;
While these blotched souls are eager to infect,
And blow their bad breath in a sister's face,
As if they got some ease by it."
If the reader views with disgust and horror the above rules of ordinary
practice in _man_-midwifery--and what man is base enough (save an
accoucheur) not so to regard them?--these feelings will be intensified a
thousand-fold by the contemplation of the latest invention[31] of
"obstetric art." We allude to the SPECULUM. The adoption of this
instrument, as we are informed, is now becoming general; and its
employment plunges its wretched victim, woman, down into the lowest deep
of infamy and degradation. We will not pollute our pages by describing its
method of action; suffice it to say, that, to the sense of _touch_,
common to all midwifery practice, is added, in its application, that of
_sight_; exposure the most complete of all which modesty, even in the most
abject of races, invariably conceals.
[Illustration: G. Morant. Inc.
THE SPECULUM]
In confirmation of our own view of this most villanous invention, we will
convict its advocates by the testimony of distinguished members of their
own profession. The denunciations of the speculum, by these
morally-courageous men, addressed, for the most part, solely to their
fellow-practitioners, shall now go forth to be read and pondered on by
every reflecting Englishman who may chance to open these pages.
"We have already exposed, with our utmost vigour, the improper practice
which Drs. Ashwell and Lee so strongly condemned. All we said on that
occasion we repeat now.... To employ it (the speculum), as it is rumoured
certain persons in London have employed it, to attract notice, and place
themselves prominently before the public--to use it merely as a means of
personal advancement--in fact, _to gain practice_--is a crime against the
laws of morality, and treason against professional honour.
"The erroneous and one-sided opinions, which the advocates for the
indiscriminate use of the speculum hold, prove how little they have
presented to themselves the true facts of the case. Dr. Locock, who made
the startling assertion that delicacy ought not to be considered in
matters of disease, and was both for and against the speculum, said, that
he looked into the vagina as he would into the throat. True enough, so far
as _he_ simply is concerned. He would look into the vagina as an ordinary
matter of business, and think _only_ of what, in the course of business,
it might be necessary to do there. But would the _woman_ regard it in this
philosophical light? Is it the same to _her_ whether her tongue is pressed
down with a spatula, or her vagina distended with a speculum? Is _her_
moral state to be left out of account altogether, and are we to treat the
most sensitive organ in her frame as if it was so much inert matter, whose
great use was to be cauterized?
"We do not hesitate to say, that no man, who regards properly his science
and himself, can ever use this instrument without feeling that he is
_driven_ to it; that other means have failed, and that it has become
necessary to adopt additional modes of investigation and of cure. And if
it appear from the inquiries which will, doubtless, now be made--that the
necessities for its employment have been knowingly exaggerated by its
advocates, no condemnation can be too severe for so great a breach of
scientific honour."--_Medical Times_, 8th June, 1850.
"Dr. Marshall Hall describes in the _Lancet_ a new form of hysteria,
connected with and caused by the abuse of the speculum. In his preliminary
remarks, alluding to the manner in which the charge of indecency was
received by one of the speakers at the late meeting of the
Medico-Chirurgical Society, on the ground of the non-necessity of the
exposure of the person, he says, 'But if there be no exposure of the
person, is there, at first, no wounding of the feeling, and is there
afterwards no deterioration and blunting of those feelings by the repeated
daily or weekly use of the speculum vaginae in the virgin, and in the very
young, even amongst the married?' He declares that there is such
deterioration, and that the female who has been subjected to such
treatment is not the same person, in delicacy and purity, she was before.
Dr. Marshall Hall's declaration on this point is fully confirmed by the
results of experience. The consequences of the abuse of this practice are,
indeed, lamentable. Dr. Hall says he has known cases of the most revolting
attachment on the part of the patients to the practice and the
practitioner. The current of the ideas becomes hypochondriacally directed
to the organs of generation. The very mind is poisoned. A new and
lamentable form of hysteria is induced. The patients become reserved, and
moody, and perverse, and speak unintelligibly in broken sentences; the
peace and happiness of the family are broken up; subjects are discussed on
the domestic hearth which ought never to be mentioned except in the sick
room--words which wound are spoken, and thoughts which are derogatory are
expressed by others, perhaps by the male, members of the family. Dr. Hall
mentions cases in which the speculum has been repeatedly employed, and had
induced this sad, wretched state, and yet no uterine disease existed. He
believes the cases in which the young, and especially the unmarried, are
afflicted, so as really to justify the use of the speculum, to be rare,
and the cases in which the injection of a solution of nitrate of silver,
by the patient herself, may not take the place of the application of this
valuable remedy in substance by the hand of the practitioner, to be rare
indeed. We heartily thank Dr. Marshall Hall for this additional blow at
'the pollution.' It is greatly to his credit."--_Medical Times_, 15th
June, 1850.
"I have no doubt that I was one of a considerable number, who, at the last
meeting of the Royal Medical and Chirurgical Society (a meeting which will
long be memorable in its annals), wished to express their sentiments on
the subject of the use of the speculum vaginae, without having what they
deemed a perfect opportunity. I regret that the discussion was not
adjourned to another evening.
"I think the profession deeply indebted to Dr. Robert Lee for bringing
this question forward for discussion. It is not one of mere medical or
surgical treatment, but of medical and public ethics; and I confess myself
astonished at the light manner in which a vaginal examination was spoken
of by one of the gentlemen present at the Society. I think the challenge
of Dr. Bennet should have been accepted at once, and that a committee
should have been, and should now be, appointed to test the existence, or
the non-existence, of the thousand and one 'ulcers,' or 'abrasions,' of
which so much has been said of late.
"The gentleman to whom I have alluded above, huffed the idea of indecency
in making a vaginal examination. There need be no exposure of the person
of the patient. Surgeons make no scruple about an examination of the
rectum (as if the two examinations could, morally speaking, be compared).
But, if there be no exposure of the person, and if the examination of the
rectum be frequently made, is there, at first, no wounding of the
feelings? and is there afterwards no deterioration and blunting of those
feelings by the repeated daily or weekly use of the speculum vaginae in the
virgin, and in the very young, even amongst the married? I loudly
proclaim that there is such deterioration, and that the female who has
been subjected to such treatment is not the same person, in delicacy and
purity, that she was before.
"I have known cases of the most revolting attachment, on the part of such
patients, to the practice and to the practitioner. I have known them to
speak of the 'womb' and of the 'uterine organs' with a familiarity which
was formerly unknown, and which, I trust, will, ere long, be obsolete. The
current of the ideas becomes hypochondriacally directed to these organs.
The very mind is poisoned. A new and lamentable form of _hysteria_--I had
almost said of _furor uterinus_--is induced, with this aggravation, that
the subject of distress is either concealed by the greatest effort, or
explained at the expense of virgin or female modesty.
"There is a case of 'poisoned mind' in the male sex, induced by the quack
doings of the day, relative to the existence of impotency, which all of us
must have treated and deplored. A similar case of 'mental poisoning' is
now being induced in the other sex, by the frequent, constant, and undue
reference, on the part of the profession, to the condition of the 'uterine
organs.'"...
"One poor, miserable patient comes to me weekly, thus afflicted. She has
been treated by the speculum and the caustic for months, as an out-patient
at University College Hospital. I sent her to Dr. Robert Lee twice. Twice
that gentleman examined, and declared that there was _no_ uterine or
vaginal disease. Meanwhile the miserable patient's mind is absorbed by
this ideal malady, and the peace of her husband's home is destroyed.
"I sent another patient to Dr. Robert Lee a few days ago (whom I had never
seen) under similar circumstances, but moving in a different rank of life.
The same opinion was given, the miserable patient suffering dire
disappointment!
"I recently attended a poor curate's wife, who had come to London for
medical aid, at, as I suppose, great inconvenience. During my short
attendance, this patient was constantly urged by a friend, a titled lady
(the aristocracy always take the lead in quackery), to send for her
physician, who is a strong abettor of the speculum. The course which
followed may be imagined, and need not be described. A case of more
complicated misery for a husband cannot well be conceived. A sickly wife,
afflicted with uterine hypochondriasis, set upon by a titled advocate of
the uterine quackery, with straitened resources.
"The advocates of the speculum speak of cases which had resisted the
efficacy of the usual general and local treatment, and which yielded to
the use of the speculum and the caustic. I have seen cases in which, the
speculum and caustic having been employed--and unduly employed, as I
believe--the patient remained more miserably afflicted in mind and body
than ever, and this the effect of that treatment. Whether the former
supposition be as well founded as the latter, I will not presume to
determine; but I believe the cases in which the young, and especially the
unmarried, are afflicted, so as really to justify the use of the speculum,
to be rare, and the cases in which the injection of a solution of nitrate
of silver, by her own hands, may not take the place of the application of
this valuable remedy in substance, by the hand of the practitioner, to be
rare indeed.
"I will not advert even to the epithets which have been applied to the
frequent use of the speculum by our French neighbours, who are so skilled
in these matters; but I will ask, WHAT FATHER AMONGST US, AFTER THE
DETAILS WHICH I HAVE GIVEN, WOULD ALLOW HIS VIRGIN DAUGHTER TO BE
SUBJECTED TO THIS 'POLLUTION'? Let us, then, maintain the spotless dignity
of our profession, with its well-deserved character for purity of morals,
and throw aside this injurious practice with indignant scorn, remembering
that it is not mere exposure of the person, but the dulling of the edge of
the virgin modesty, and the degradation of the pure minds of the daughters
of England, which are to be avoided." _Dr Marshall Hall in the 'Lancet.'_
Dr. Dickson, an eminent medical reformer, and accomplished surgeon and
physician, formerly on the staff, and now, and for many years past, in
extensive practice in London, says:--
"But of all the medical quackeries that have sprung up in these times,
none can compare with the infamous _speculum_ treatment of certain members
of the faculty, who confine their practice principally to females. No
matter what may be the woman's real complaint--a cough, pain of the side,
or anything else--she is at once assured that it proceeds from 'disease of
the womb.' A pretended examination must, forsooth, be gone through, which,
in every case, is made to confirm the dishonest assurance given in the
first instance. The patient is forthwith victimized, week after week, and
month after month, with a host of operations, for a disease which, in the
beginning, at least, never existed at all, but which is very soon brought
on artificially by the horrible appliances of men, who ride in their
carriages, by this daily and hourly outrage to the constitutions and the
decency of our women."--_The Forbidden Book_, vol. ii. page 195.
Again, in the same work, appears the following letter, under the head of
"Obstetric Quackery in Edinburgh:"--"SIR,--The members of the Town Council
of Edinburgh are the patrons of the University. Most of them are known to
be conscientious men, and keenly alive to all that can affect the honour
and the usefulness of the institution over which they preside. It appears
extraordinary that they should have remained so long unacquainted with the
leprosy which has infected some of the professors; or that they should not
have summarily driven these persons from the chairs they were polluting,
when the fact was discovered.... It is to him (Dr. Simpson) that we
chiefly owe the infinitely more dangerous and disgusting quackery in
midwifery, which rages like a pestilence in London, and in every town and
village throughout the empire, and in some of our most distant colonies.
On the present occasion, it may be sufficient to enumerate the proceedings
to which I allude: To Dr. Simpson we owe the invention of the dangerous
weapon called the uterine-sound or poker--pessaries which have justly been
designated infernal and impaling uterine machines, to cure retroversions
which never existed; instruments for pumping the uterus, to excite
menstruation; and the proposal to rub its inner surface with lunar
caustic, for the same purpose. To him we owe the hysterotome, for slitting
open the os uteri, to cure sterility; and to his efforts, more than any
other individual, we are indebted for the profligate use of the speculum
which has prevailed, and the practice of destroying the os and cervix
uteri with caustic potash. To Dr. Simpson we owe the attempt to revive the
brutal practice of turning in cases of distortion of the pelvis; of
attempting to substitute the Caesarian operation for the induction of
premature labour; to him we owe the attempt to subvert the established
practice in placental presentation, by extraordinary statistic tables;
and, lastly, we owe to the genius of the Professor of Midwifery in the
University of Edinburgh, the baby-sucker! Are these specimens of what the
_Edinburgh Monthly Journal_ for this month calls 'the simple treatment
taught and practised in Edinburgh, and which, if adopted in London, would
reduce many practitioners from comfort to starvation?' We may well excuse
the members of the Town Council if they are not so dexterous in
_harliquinade_ as the University Professor.--I am, Sir, your obedient
Servant, ISAAC IRONS, M.D. Sept., 1851."
We now proceed to quote the words of "a Fellow of the Royal College of
Surgeons," which appear in a pamphlet entitled, "The Speculum: its Moral
Tendencies." We believe the author to be very well known, both as a writer
in the medical periodicals, and as a skilful and accomplished surgeon. He
says--"Were fame and fortune, however, the only results, were the public
simply gulled, there would be nothing in its consequences to take this
imposition out of the ordinary category. But, unfortunately, this is not
the case. The practices of these men leave results of a far more serious
and lasting character, not to be sought for amongst material things, but
in the lowered and loosened state to which it is rapidly bringing the
morality of the country.
"This is a strong assertion, but not stronger than the facts that support
it. The profession is well aware of the baleful tendency of the
proceedings of these men, whilst they deplore their inability to prevent
or to expose them. Scarcely a member of it whom you meet but has a tale to
tell of their practices, which, if made public, would bring the mighty
from their seats; but there is too much indecency involved in the
disclosure to allow of its publicity. Thus are they doubly hedged; _their
diploma checks suspicion, whilst the nature of their performances secures
them secrecy_.
"To believe in the necessity for this constant and general use of the
speculum, is to admit a sad deterioration in nature itself. Either this,
or that anterior generations were great sufferers without being aware of
it. Perhaps, like the Spartan boy they endured in silence, rather than
betray a want of courage, or, what was more laudable, a want of delicacy.
"But I do not believe in this. I believe the workmanship of the Creator to
be as perfect now as of yore, and that the modern and multitudinous
disorders attributed to the uterine system are wicked inventions put forth
to sanction unnecessary interference. Why, if we are to believe these men,
there is scarcely a patient who applies to them that is not suffering from
one or the other of these numerous affections. The womb, with them, is so
invariably out of order or out of position, that disease and dislocation
are more constant than its normal conditions. Young or old, married or
single, whatever their age, whatever their condition, the same opinion,
the same treatment, varied only in the selection of the instrument. No
matter what the complaint, or what the ailment, the _fons et origo mali_
is declared to be the uterus....
"Nor are these practices confined to the high priests in these temples of
immorality; faith in their professions now pervades a large portion of
female society; like the flame in a stubble field the mania has spread,
the convert quickly becomes the proselyte, and the consequence is, that
some men, in the general practice of our profession, are induced to shape
their treatment less by the nature of the complaints, than the suggestions
of their patients....
"The result of this can be easily imagined; unskilfulness is associated
with fraud. The Speculum is brought into play, and startling are the
revelations made by its glittering wall. Alarmed or amused, no matter
which, the patient is secured, and remains long enough under treatment to
familiarize her with indecency, and to enable the practical hand of the
neophyte to attain the _tour de maitre_, both in handling the instrument
and the fee....
"Then again, these uterine complaints, contrary to the laws that govern
local affections, are made to assume an almost epidemic character, for it
is by no means uncommon to hear that several members of the same household
are under treatment, as they call it, at the same time....
"But besides those whom I have mentioned as abusing the Speculum, there
are others, who, more honest, yet not less dangerous, are, unconsciously
perhaps, contributing their share to this work of demoralization; I mean
that portion of the profession who, unable to form opinions for
themselves, are ready at all times _jurare in verba magistri_, adopting
any practice, provided the example be set in high places.... with these
men one would like to deal charitably; but the best of motives must not be
allowed to compensate the consequences of dangerous acts; THEY MUST NOT BE
ALLOWED TO JEOPARDISE THE MODESTY OF THE SEX, SO LONG THE PRIDE AND THE
PROPERTY OF ENGLAND.
"That an instrument, capable in its application of such wide-spreading
mischief, should possess some compensating good, some power whereby
diseases, hitherto obscure and intractable, should be compelled to render
up the morbid secrets on which they rest, and to take their place amongst
curable disorders, was to have been expected, and had this been so, the
case would stand far differently....
"But unfortunately this is not the case; the diseases here alluded to,
though obnoxious to its application, instead of being benefited are
materially aggravated by its use; take, for instance, the scirrhous
affections, in these cases its use is not only inefficacious, but
positively injurious--it only adds torture to torment....
"Driven, then, from the field of real disease, these advocates of the
Speculum are obliged to invest with a false character ailments that the
profession has hitherto regarded as too trifling to admit of any save the
simplest treatment.... The Speculum has been greatly extolled as the means
of conveying appliances immediately to the parts affected. But it must not
be forgotten that the effects of local remedies in constitutional
affections are short-lived in the extreme, or that those can hardly be
called remedies, that are notoriously so slow in their operation, as to
leave it doubtful whether they have not, after all, been robbing time of
the merit of the recovery.
"That the profession is silent on these abuses is, in my opinion, to be
deplored. Such silence may arise from the fear that the denunciation of
them would tend to lower it in the estimation of the public, more than the
continuance of the abuses themselves. Yielding to none in the desire to
uphold the dignity of my order, I must say that I share in no such
apprehensions. The public in return for the confidence they repose in us,
have a right to such protection, and if they find that it has been
withheld, that, in a mistaken solicitude for our own interests, we have
neglected theirs, they will bind us all up in one common withe together,
and the diploma, though it may still indicate the man of science, will
cease to insure us the position of gentlemen."[32]
The last extract which we shall give appears in the _Lancet_, a periodical
whose very title is behind the age, indicative of professional bigotry, a
record of antiquated fallacy and prejudice. The tide must surely be on the
turn, or the exposure of these speculumizing villainies would never have
been permitted to grace its columns:--
"On the use of the speculum in the diagnosis and treatment of uterine
diseases, by Dr. Robert Lee, the author referred to the tabular statement
of 220 cases of real and imaginary disease of the uterus, published in the
38th volume of the Medico-Chirurgical Transactions, and presented in a
similar tabular form the details (of) eighty additional cases, which had
since come under his observation. Of the 300 patients forty-seven were
unmarried, one had barely completed her eighteenth year, several were
under twenty, and the majority under thirty years of age, and were
suffering from hysteria, leucorrhoea, dysmenorrhoea, or some nervous
affection of the uterus, without inflammation, ulceration, or any
structural disease or displacement of the organ. In Case 256 the patient
had been told that the womb was prolapsed and much ulcerated, and an
instrument had been introduced for six weeks, with an aggravation of all
the symptoms. The hymen was found so perfect on examination that it was
impossible to reach the os uteri without using an unjustifiable degree of
violence. On the ground of morality, and on every other ground, he could
see no defence for the employment of the speculum in these forty-seven
cases. Of the 300 patients seventy were barren, and the sterility was not
removed, nor the other symptoms relieved in a single instance. SEVERAL OF
THESE INDIVIDUALS SPOKE WITH HORROR AND SHAME OF THE TREATMENT TO WHICH
THEY HAD BEEN SUBMITTED. A considerable number of the cases were suffering
from cancerous disease, in all of which the symptoms seemed to have been
aggravated by the treatment. In Case 236 the character of the disease was
unmistakable, but after an examination with the speculum a favourable
prognosis had been given, and the actual cautery employed for months, and
hopes of recovery held out to the last. The author expressed his
conviction that neither in the living nor in the dead body had he ever
seen a case of simple ulceration from chronic inflammation of the os or
cervix uteri; and to apply the term to states of the os uteri in which the
mucous membrane or, as it is termed by some, the basement membrane, is not
destroyed by ulceration, was an abuse of terms calculated only to deceive
and mislead the members of the medical profession, from whom the truth has
been carefully concealed. The speculum emanates from the syphilitic wards
of the hospitals at Paris, and _it would have been better for the women of
England had its use been confined to those institutions_."--The _Lancet_,
July 25, 1857.
Such is the language of earnest, honourable men, who have dared to dispel,
by the light of true philosophy, the fog of "scientific" rascaldom--that
empiric haze so desolating, so destructive to the inwrapped and blinded
public. Few will deny that there are, in the foregoing extracts,
sentiments which do honour to their authors, and revelations for which
society should feel the deepest gratitude.
Were we to relate the numbers of weak and deluded creatures who, upon the
slightest pretext, submit to this accursed rite, it would appear
incredible. We know that one fashionable pretender to peculiar skill in
the diagnostics of uterine affections, has boasted of five such
examinations in one family in a single day! and that another has spoken of
the exposure of _fifty_ women to his professional gaze in the same space
of time. These are facts--horrible, but undeniable, facts! "O shame! where
is thy blush?" O woman! where is thy vaunted modesty, in a country tainted
by such unspeakable and hideous mysteries, permitted--nay, tacitly
encouraged--as they are, under the hypocritical guise of scientific
discovery, and the pretended mitigation of human ills? Is it possible
that in this age, and in this our land, men should be found so utterly
insensate, so beggared of all feeling, so lost to all the chivalry of
manhood, that, with this libidinous iniquity made patent, they would not
arise, and, in one mighty and overwhelming surge of execration, crush its
perpetrators, and abolish this obscene invasion of marital rights. No!
perish the thought! The azure blood, which throbbed and pulsated in the
British heart in those far off days of the second Richard, when the
indecent outrages of the poll-tax gatherers lashed the people into fury at
their daughters' wrongs, still runs in the veins of Englishmen; and we
will not believe that the halo of purity, which made the homes of "merrie
England" the watchword of our sires, can have departed for ever from those
of their descendants.