the impregnated ovum has dropped;[1] they are largest and most conspicuous in the early state of pregnancy, and remain for some time after delivery, when they gradually fade and wither until they disappear. The phenomenon has been eagerly seized by the juridical physician as furnishing an indication of pregnancy; and, to a certain degree, the test may be admitted; but cases have occurred in which a corpus luteum has been found, where impregnation could not have occurred;[2] it is probable that upon certain occasions extreme salacity may disengage an ovum, and thus produce the corpus luteum, although the former without sexual intercourse can never be developed in the uterus; but this is an exception to the general law of Nature, and the corpus luteum may still be regarded as a presumptive proof of pregnancy. Mr. Stanley, in a very excellent memoir, published in the Medical Transactions of the College, vol. vi, observes that "the corpora lutea in the ovaries of virgins may, in general, be distinguished from those which are the consequence of impregnation, by their smaller size."
After all that has been said, our opinion in a case of supposed impregnation must, in the earlier stages, be formed from a review of all the circumstances appertaining to the condition of the uterus, ovaria, and fallopian tubes; and should these present such appearances as they usually assume in pregnancy, and
- ↑ See our Physiological History of Conception and Utero-gestation, vol. i, p. 230.—Dr. Blundell's Memoir, entitled "Experiments on a few controverted points respecting the Physiology of Generation." Medico-Chirurg. Trans. vol. x, p. 245.
- ↑ In the year 1788, Blumenbach shewed that corpora lutea may exist in the ovaries of virgins (Comment. Soc. Reg. Scient. Gotting. vol. ix.) Cuvier has also noticed the appearance of cicatrices in the ovaria of women who had never known any intercourse with the male.
