Amongst the earliest dissertations which appeared on questions connected with the subject of Jurisprudence, and which merits notice on this occasion, is one by _Frederic Bonaventura_, an eminent scholar and physician of Urbino, in Italy, who flourished in the early part of the seventeenth century, entitled, “_De Natura partus octomestris, adversus vulgarem opinionem, libri decem._” Francof. 1601; an enormous folio volume, containing upwards of one thousand pages, on this uninteresting subject; in which he has introduced the opinions of different writers, and an account of all the controversies that have been held on the legitimate period of utero-gestation. The most celebrated however of all the Italian works which have descended to us, is that of _Paul Zacchias_,[33] physician to Pope Innocent the Tenth, who was long considered as the only arbiter of questions relating to any of the subjects of Juridical Medicine. The estimation in which this work was universally held may be easily discovered, from the expressions with which it is mentioned by all cotemporary writers. _Zacutus Lusitanus_, in alluding to its value, exclaims “Emi,—vidi—legi—obstupui”! When we consider the period at which it was written, it must certainly be acknowledged as a very extraordinary work; that it should be overrun with casuistical subtleties cannot be a matter of surprise; the style too is entirely scholastic, full of digression, and prolix passages of erudition, but such was the taste of the age in which it was composed. We are also to remember that at this period, the philosophy of _Aristotle_ alone directed the schools, and the doctrines of _Galen_, illustrated by a thousand servile commentators were, according to the judgment of that æra, the only sources from which medical opinions could be legitimately deduced. The study of Anatomy had only then commenced under the guidance of _Vesalius_, _Columbus_, _Fallopius_, and _Eustachius_; while Surgery, notwithstanding the labours of _Paré_, _Arceus_, _Andrew Dalla Croce_, _Aqua Pendente_, and other masters, was in its mere infancy. Chemistry too was as yet full of conceit and uncertainty; and Pharmacy was absolutely without any acknowledged principles. As the great work of _Zacchias_ was composed at different periods, with considerable intervals between each, we find numerous repetitions, and contradictions. It is therefore evident, that although the “_Quæstiones Medico-legales_” may afford much instruction to the learned physician, it can be of no service to the student; this opinion is justly expressed by “_Camerarius_[34]—_Quisquis Pauli Zacchiæ opus legere cum fructu voluerit, insigni jam rerum medicarum notitia instructus sit oportet; eo magis quod alia sit modernæ Medicinæ facies; ditissimus enim thesaurus est liber iste, supplendus tamen subinde ex aliis fontibus recentioribus._”