Before such articles occasion serious harm, it is necessary that some cause coincide, by means of which the foreign bodies are detained long in the same part of the intestines; otherwise the irritation they produce is too trivial to excite disease.
The only substance of this kind which it is necessary to particularize is pounded glass. A common notion prevails that pounded glass is an active poison. There is no doubt, indeed, that it does possess some irritant properties even when finely pulverized; for it titillates and smarts the nostrils, and inflames the eyes. There is also little doubt that when swallowed in fragments of moderate size, especially if the stomach is empty, it may wound the viscera. But it is in this way only that it has any action when swallowed, and even then its effects are by no means uniformly serious. It can have no chemical action on the stomach; it cannot act through absorption, as it is quite insoluble: and when finely pulverized, it cannot easily wound the villous coat of the alimentary canal, on account of the abundance and viscidity of the lubricating mucus.
Accordingly, M. Lesauvage ascertained that 2½ drachms of the powder may be given to a cat at once without hurting the animal,—that in the course of eight days seven ounces might be given to a dog without any bad consequence, although the period chosen for administering it was always some time before meals,—and that even when the glass was in fragments a line in length, no symptoms of irritation were induced. Relying indeed on these results he himself swallowed a considerable number of similar fragments; and did not sustain any injury.[[1602]] Caldani likewise, an Italian physician, after some experiments on animals, gave a boy fifteen years old several drachms of pounded glass, without observing any bad effects; and at his request Mandruzzato repeated his experiments on animals, and himself swallowed on two successive days two drachms and a half each day without sustaining any injury.[[1603]]
Similar observations have been made by others also. Dr. Turner of Spanish Town, Jamaica, has informed me, that an attempt was made there by a negro to poison a whole family by administering pounded glass; but, although a large quantity was taken by seven persons, none of them suffered any inconvenience. Not long ago the occurrence of a similar case at Paris gave rise to a careful investigation of the whole subject by Baudelocque and Chaussier. A young man, Lavalley, married a girl who was pregnant by him; but it was agreed that she should live with her father till her delivery was over. A month after the marriage Lavalley invited his wife and father-in-law to dinner; and his wife ate heartily boiled pork, bloody-sausages, and roast-veal, and subsequently drank coffee with brandy in it. On returning home in the evening she became unwell, continued so all night, next morning was seized with violent pain in the stomach and vomiting, and died in convulsions. The period of her death is not mentioned in the report I have seen. A suspicion of poisoning having arisen after burial, the body was disinterred in forty-two days; and, although it was much decayed, black points and patches could be distinguished in many parts of the bowels, together with a quantity of broken down glass. The medical inspectors accordingly declared that she had died of poisoning with pounded glass; and the husband was imprisoned. Baudelocque and Chaussier, who were consulted, ascribed the black patches to putrefaction or venous congestion, and declared that in whatever way the glass had got into the bowels, she had not died of poisoning with the substance, as pounded glass is not deleterious.[[1604]] A similar opinion as to the properties of pounded glass was more lately given by Professor Marc, when consulted on a case of attempted poisoning, in which the person against whom the attempt was made felt the rough particles in his mouth while taking the second spoonful of soup in which the glass was contained.[[1605]]
This opinion certainly appears to be in general true. At the same time instances are not wanting to render it probable, that pounded or broken glass is occasionally hurtful. Thus, passing over the more doubtful examples recorded by the older authors, we have the two following cases related by good authorities in the most modern times. One has been published by Mr. Hebb of Worcester. A child, eleven months old, died of a few days’ illness in very suspicious circumstances. On Mr. Hebb being requested by the coroner to examine the body, he found the inside of the stomach lined with a tough layer of mucus streaked with blood; the villous coat was highly vascular, and covered with numberless particles of glass of various sizes, some of which simply touched, while others lacerated it; and no other morbid appearance could be detected in the body.[[1606]] The other case is described by Portal. A man undertook for a wager to eat his wine-glass, and actually swallowed a part of it. But he was attacked with acute pain in the stomach, and subsequently with convulsions. Portal made him eat a surfeit of cabbage; and having thus enveloped the fragments, administered an emetic, which brought away the glass and vegetables together.[[1607]] The same feat has undoubtedly been sometimes accomplished with impunity. For example, in the Edinburgh Medical and Surgical Journal, an instance is related of a man who champed and swallowed three-fourths of a drinking-glass without suffering any harm; and the person mentioned by Osiander swallowed many pieces of glass, and sustained no inconvenience (p. [503]). But these facts will not altogether outweigh the equally pointed narratives of Portal and Mr. Hebb. And, on the whole, the medical jurist must come to the conclusion, that broken and pounded glass, though generally harmless, may sometimes prove injurious or even fatal.[[1608]] Powdered glass, however, is probably inert.
Another variety of injury from the mechanical irritants is inflammation from hot liquids, such as melted lead or boiling water. These, when swallowed, may unquestionably cause serious mischief, and even death; and the symptoms they induce are exactly those of the irritant poisons properly so called.
The effects of boiling water have been investigated experimentally by Dr. Bretonneau of Tours; and the results illustrate forcibly the observations which have been repeatedly made in the course of this work, respecting the slight constitutional derangement caused by such poisons as have merely a local irritating power. He found that when boiling water was injected in the quantity of eight ounces into the stomach of dogs, it excited inflammation, passing on to gangrene, both in the villous and muscular coats. The symptoms, however, were trifling. For a day or two the animals appeared languid; but in three days they generally became lively and playful, one of them actually lined a bitch, and it was only on strangling them and examining the bodies, that the extent of the mischief was discovered.[[1609]]
I am not aware that any such case have hitherto occurred in man. Death from drinking boiling water, indeed, is not an uncommon accident, particularly in Ireland and some parts of England, where children, who are in the habit of drinking cold water from the tea-kettle, have swallowed boiling water by mistake. It appears, however, that in these instances death is not owing to inflammation of the gullet and stomach, but to inflammation of the upper part of the windpipe,—the water never passing lower than the pharynx. The best information on this subject is contained in an interesting paper by Dr. Hall.[[1610]] He has there given the particulars of four cases which came under his notice; from which it follows that the disease induced is always cynanche laryngea, proving fatal by suffocation. Two of his patients died suffocated; another, while in imminent danger, was relieved by tracheotomy, but died afterwards of exhaustion; the fourth recovered suddenly during a fit of screaming, when apparently about to be choked; and it was supposed that the vesicles around the glottis had been burst by the cries.
Pouring melted lead down the throat was a frequent mode of despatching criminals and prisoners in former ages. Only one authentic case is to be found on record of death from this cause in modern times. It occurred at the burning of the Eddistone light-house. A man, while gazing up at the fire with his mouth open, received a shower of melted lead from the building, and expired after twelve days of suffering. Seven ounces and a half of lead had reached the stomach; and the stomach was severely burnt, and ulcerated.[[1611]]
In concluding the Irritant Poisons, and before proceeding to the next class, the Narcotics, it is necessary to observe, that besides the substances which have been treated of, there are others not usually considered poisons, and some that are even used daily for seasoning food, which, nevertheless, when taken in large quantities, will prove injurious and even occasion all the chief symptoms of the active irritants. These substances connect the true poisons with substances which are inert in regard to the animal economy.