_Case 22_ is important, as having given rise to a prosecution. The medical man, an officier de santé, named Kobelt, was accused of homicide, by imprudence, want of precautions, &c. The chloroform was administered on a handkerchief, and the accident occurred as suddenly as any of the others. The husband of the patient stated that the whole process did not last a minute. “I observed attentively,” he said, “during this time, and the character that her countenance took all at once made me apprehensive. I spoke of it to the operator, who tranquillized me, and continued to extract the teeth. After the third tooth, however, he partook of my apprehension, suspended the operation, and proceeded to adopt measures indicated by the circumstances.” Professor Sédillot, who had to pronounce an opinion on the case, after hearing all the evidence, said, “I do not think that M. Kobelt is guilty of imprudence or of rashness, because that officier de santé has followed a practice very habitually employed, and even recommended, by eminent practitioners, whose example and authority were sufficient to inspire him with security, and shade him from reproach.” The accused practitioner was acquitted. The above remark of Sédillot applied to the plan of causing insensibility very rapidly, as first recommended by Dr. Simpson; and he added some observations, to the effect that, when used in a different manner, chloroform is free from danger. The above case occurred at Strasbourg, on June 10th, 1851. The name of the patient was Madame Simon, and her age thirty-six. After death the lungs were found to be somewhat congested, and emphysematous. Heart flaccid, of middle size; right cavities filled with liquid dark-coloured blood, mixed with some fibrinous clots. The left cavities contained similar blood in much smaller quantity.[89]