Page:Treatise on poisons in relation to medical jurisprudence, physiology, and the practice of physic (IA treatiseonpoison00chriuoft).pdf/327

This page needs to be proofread.

has been given in an inaugural dissertation contained in one of Haller's Collections. The author, Quelmalz, says that the ptyalism sometimes continued for three weeks, that it was in one instance as great in extent as the most violent mercurial salivation, and that it was accompanied by fetor, superficial ulceration of the mouth, pustules on the tongue, relaxation of the gums, and looseness of the teeth.[1]

Salivation may likewise be produced by the influence of the imagination. I have seen a singular example of this. A woman who had a great aversion to calomel was taking it with digitalis for a dropsical complaint. Some one having told her what she was using, she immediately began to complain of soreness of the mouth, salivated profusely, and even put on the expression of countenance of a salivating person, although she had taken only two grains. On being persuaded, however, that she had been misinformed, the discharge ceased gradually in the course of one night. Two days afterwards she was again told on good authority that calomel was contained in her medicines, upon which the salivation began again and was profuse. It did not last above twenty-four hours; but the symptoms during that period resembled a commencing mercurial salivation in every thing but the want of fetor and redness of the gums.

In general, mercurial salivation may be easily distinguished from all the preceding varieties by an experienced practitioner. If its progress has been traced from the first appearance of brassy taste and fetor to the formation of ulcers and supervention of ptyalism, no attentive person can run any risk of mistaking it. Its characters are also quite distinct at the time salivation just begins. The fetor of the breath and sponginess and ulceration of the gums at this stage distinguish it from every other affection. But if the state of the mouth is not examined till the ulcers have existed several days, the characters of the mercurial disorder are much more equivocal. They cannot be distinguished, for example, from some forms of idiopathic ulceration of the mouth connected with unsoundness of the constitution, and characterized by extensive sloughing, ptyalism, and gangrenous fetor.[2] In particular they cannot be distinguished from the effects of the disease called cancrum oris. A few years ago indeed a London physician was charged, in consequence of this resemblance, with having killed, by mercurial salivation, a patient to whom it was proved that he had not given a particle of mercury, and who clearly died of the disease in question;[3] and a similar case, where fatal mercurial salivation was suspected, but which was clearly proved on a Coroner's Inquest to have been also a case of cancrum oris, has been more lately published by Mr. Dunn.[4]

For distinguishing these and such other affections from mercurial

  1. De Ptyalismo Febrili. Diss. Inaug. Lipsiæ, in Halleri Disput. de Morb. Histor. i. 469.
  2. See Evidence of Mr. Bromfield on the Trial of Miss Butterfield for the murder of Mr. Scawen, p. 40.
  3. London Medical Gazette, 1839-40, ii. 875.
  4. Lancet, 1843-44, i. 60.