TRIALS FOR POISONING BY STRYCHNIA. PALMER, DOVE, AND BARLOW.
THREE cases are reported in this chapter. (1) That of William Palmer,
for the poisoning of John Parsons Cook, at Rugeley, in Staffordshire,
which, in consequence of the prejudice existing against him in that
county, was transferred by Act of Parliament to the Central Criminal
Court in the City of London,[26] and taken before Lord Chief Justice
Campbell, on the 14th, and eleven following days, of May, 1856. (2)
That of William Dove, for the murder of his wife, Harriet, at Leeds,
tried at York, July 16th, 1856, before Baron Bramwell. (3) That of
Silas Barlow, for the murder of his mistress, Eliza Soper, at Vauxhall,
tried at the Central Criminal Court, November, 1876, before Mr. Justice
Denman.
The _first_ of these trials is remarkable for the conflict of the
medico-scientific evidence, the most eminent men among our physicians
and analysts being called on either side, and the most contradictory
testimony as to the possibility of detecting strychnia being given by
them. The _second_ trial shows the dangerous effect of hasty newspaper
reports in such cases—the murder of his wife by Dove having been
clearly suggested by the popular report to which some of the journals
of the day gave circulation, that Dr. Taylor, the eminent analyst, had
stated, in connection with Palmer’s case, that strychnia could not be
detected by analysis. This case is also interesting from the nature
of the insanity which was set up by the defence. The _last_ trial,
that of Silas Barlow, exposes the danger of the sale of the “Vermin
Killers,” so popular with all householders, most, if not all, of which
contain a large proportion of strychnia, and thus offer a ready means
for murder or suicide, especially as the purchase of them would not be
attributed to an evil intention. It is but a poor consolation to know
that, when the mischief has been done, the punishment of the actor can
be secured by the skill of the analyst.
THE RUGELEY POISONINGS.
TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER, _May 14, and following days_, 1856.[27]
_Before_ LORD CHIEF JUSTICE CAMPBELL, BARON ALDERSON, _and_ MR.
JUSTICE CRESSWELL, _at the_ CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
_For the Prosecution_: The Attorney-General (Sir A. Cockburn), Mr.
Edwin James, Q.C., Mr. Bodkin, Mr. Welsby, and Mr. Huddlestone.
_For the Defence_: Mr. Serjeant Shee, Mr. Grove, Q.C., Mr. Gray, and
Mr. Kenealy.
_William Palmer_, surgeon, of Rugeley, Staffordshire, aged 31, was
indicted for the wilful murder of John Parsons Cook.
HISTORY OF THE CASE.
_Connection between Cook and Palmer._
_Mr. Cook_, having been originally brought up as a solicitor, on coming
into a fortune of from £12,000 to £13,000, abandoned his profession,
and took to the turf, where he became acquainted with the prisoner,
who had for some years kept racehorses. Originally in good local
practice, Palmer had of late transferred the majority of his patients
to a Mr. Thirlby, who had previously been his assistant, retaining only
two or three more immediately connected with him or his family. His
father, originally a working sawyer, had, by his industry, gradually
risen to be a timber merchant in a large way of business, and, on his
sudden death in 1837, left a fortune of £70,000. As he died intestate,
the eldest son executed a deed by which each of the children took
£7,000, and the remainder was left to the widow. Of these children,
seven in number, the prisoner was the fourth. As a child he was known
for his amiability and kindness, but also for his shy and underhand
manner, and his partiality for trying experiments of a cruel nature on
animals. “He was just and generous,” said one of his early friends,
“when he grew up, and he never forgot an old face.”[28] Originally
apprenticed to a firm of druggists in Liverpool, he had to leave
them in consequence of a scandal in money matters; was then put with
Mr. Tylecote, a surgeon, near Rugeley; walked the London hospitals,
living the gay life of so many of that class of students; passed his
examinations; married the illegitimate daughter of an Indian officer,
who left her a small property; and set up in Rugeley as a surgeon.
Of his five children only the first, a son, was living at the time of
his trial, the others all dying suddenly of convulsions within a few
weeks after their birth. He was an indulgent husband, a kind father, a
regular attendant at church, and apparently a religious man.
On his marriage, Palmer commenced to live in a handsome style, keeping
his carriage, and soon after began training and breeding racehorses,
and occupying himself on the turf. As his wife’s fortune was only for
her life, in 1854 he insured her life for £13,000, the premiums on
which exceeded the income he derived from her, further insurances of
a greater amount being declined by other offices. Within nine months
after this, his wife was dead, and the insurance money received,
relieving Palmer from difficulties that were already pressing on
him. Again, within three months after his wife’s death, Palmer was
endeavouring to effect insurances on the life of his brother Walter,
a confirmed drunkard, to the enormous extent of £80,000. Only one of
these policies, that in the Prince of Wales’ office, was accepted, the
other offices being put on their guard by the hint that “his wife had
died after the first payment of the premium had been made.” Pressed
by his pecuniary difficulties, he then tried to effect an insurance
for £10,000 on the life of one George Bate, a decayed farmer, whom he
employed as a kind of farm bailiff, and represented as a gentleman and
an esquire, with a famous cellar of wine, but the insurance offices
were now thoroughly awake; a detective was sent to interview the
esquire, whom he found hoeing turnips, and the scheme fell through.[29]
Since 1854, Palmer had been in the hands of the bill discounters,
and especially of a money-lending attorney in Mayfair of the name of
Pratt, with whom he from time to time discounted what purported to be
the acceptances of his mother, some of which were renewed on partial
payment, others cleared off by the money received from the insurance of
his wife’s life.
“This,” said the Attorney-General, “brings us to the close of 1854.
In the course of that year he effected another insurance in his
brother’s name, but Palmer was the real party, and corresponded with
Mr. Pratt on the subject of effecting it, and the policy for £13,000
was assigned to Palmer. On the strength of that policy, which remained
in the hands of Pratt, who paid the first premium out of a bill he
discounted for Palmer at 60 per cent., they proceeded to discount
further bills, this policy being kept as a collateral security. The
bills, in the whole, discounted in the course of that year, amounted
to £12,500—two in June, which were held over from month to month to
keep them alive—two of £2000 each in March, 1855, with the proceeds
of which Palmer bought two racehorses, Nettle and Chicken. These bills
were renewed from time to time, and eventually came due in January,
1856. Another bill for £2000 was discounted in April, 1855, renewed
like the others, and became due on the 25th of October. On the 9th of
July another bill for £2000 was discounted, renewed, and became due on
the 12th of January. On the 27th of September another bill for £1000
was discounted to pay for the renewal of the bills due and then coming
due. So that when the Shrewsbury races took place in November, 1855,
bills were due or rapidly maturing to the extent of £11,500, every
one of which bore the forged acceptance of the prisoner’s mother. You
will therefore understand the pressure which naturally and necessarily
arose upon him; the pressure of the liabilities for £11,500 which
he had not a shilling in the world to meet, and the still greater
pressure which arose from the consciousness that the moment he could
go on no longer, his mother would be resorted to for payment. The fact
of his having committed these forgeries would be known, and would
bring on him the penalty of the law for that crime so committed. The
insurance company having refused to pay the policy effected on his
brother’s life, no assistance could be derived from that source.”
Already, in May, 1855, Cook, with whom he had become intimately
acquainted in racing transactions, had lent him his acceptance for
£200 to meet a small claim, and had had to pay it on Palmer’s default.
In August of that year, Palmer again asked the money-lending attorney
of Mayfair to discount a bill of Cook’s for £500, representing that
Cook required the money. It was, however, declined without further
security, and then Cook assigned two of his racehorses—Polestar, the
subsequent winner at Shrewsbury, and Sirius—as a collateral security,
and obtained only £375 in money, and a wine warrant for £65, the rest
being swallowed up in discount and expenses. This money and warrant
Cook never got, Palmer asking Pratt to send it to the post-office at
Doncaster, whence he obtained it; and as it was made “to order,” and
bore a receipt stamp, Palmer, it was alleged, forged the name “John
Parsons Cook,” and took the cheque and the warrant, and appropriated
the proceeds. That bill would be due on the day of Cook’s death. In the
same month it was that he attempted to effect the insurance on Bate’s
life and failed; and though Cook had, at Palmer’s request, attested
this proposal, which referred to Palmer as the usual medical attendant,
beyond that he had nothing to do with this attempt.
Such was the desperate position of the prisoner at this time. It,
however, rapidly grew worse. On the 6th of November a writ for £2000
against Palmer, and another for the same sum against his mother, were
issued, but held over by Pratt in order that Palmer might make some
arrangement. This he did to the amount of £800, and in consequence,
after allowing for an exorbitant discount, £600 was taken off the bill,
leaving £1400 to be met. The Prince of Wales office had refused to pay
on Walter Palmer’s life, and Mr. Pratt would not wait any longer. On
the 13th of November, Pratt wrote him that all the bills, £11,500 in
amount, must be met—a letter which Palmer must have received the next
day—the day after that on which Cook’s horse, Polestar, won at the
Shrewsbury races. After the race, Cook had between £700 and £800 in
his pocket from bets paid on the course, and from the stakes and his
other bets would be entitled on the week after to receive more than
a thousand pounds at Tattersal’s. Before that day Cook was dead, his
pocket-book empty, and his betting-book not to be found.
Cook, though slightly disposed to pulmonary complaints, was a hale
and hearty young man, at the time of his fatal illness suffering only
from debility.[30] It was only natural that his victory should excite
him, and that with some friends he should celebrate it with two or
three bottles of champagne at the “Raven Hotel” on his return from the
course. He was, however, generally abstemious. He went to bed with
nothing the matter with him, got up the next day and went on the course
as usual. That night his illness began.
Late on the evening of the 14th of November, a betting agent of Cook’s,
of the name of _Fisher_, who was staying at the “Raven,” was invited by
Cook to come into the room where he, Palmer, and one Myatt were, and
take some brandy and water.
“They were drinking grog,” says _Fisher_; “the deceased had some
brandy and water before him. He asked me to sit down, and I did so.
Cook asked the prisoner to have some more brandy and water, and he
said he would not until Cook had drunk his. Cook then took up his
glass, and drank almost all the liquor that was in it, and, within a
minute, he exclaimed, ‘There is something in it; it burns my throat
dreadfully.’ Upon his saying this, Palmer took up the glass, and
sipped what remained in it, and said, ‘There is nothing in it.’ There
was a very small quantity in the glass when the prisoner took it up.
At this time a person of the name of _Reid_ came in, and the prisoner
handed the glass to him, and asked if he thought there was anything in
it, and handed it to me also, and we said there was nothing we could
recognize, as the glass was empty. I said, however, that there was a
strong scent upon it, but I could not detect anything but brandy. Cook
went out of the room, and when he returned he called me out. I went
with him into my sitting-room. He appeared very ill, and he told me he
had been very sick and asked me to take his money. He said he thought
Palmer had been dosing him. He gave me £700. He did not say what I
was to do with the money. He was very sick again after he had given
me the money, and asked me to go into his bedroom with him. I did
so. Another person named _Jones_ went with us; the deceased vomited
violently in his bedroom in our presence. He was so ill I recommended
him to send for Dr. Gibson, who attended and gave him some medicine.
He was certainly not drunk; there was nothing about him approaching to
drunkenness. He appeared very ill the next morning, but a good deal
better than the previous night, and I returned him his money.”[31]
_Mr. Gibson_, who saw Cook during this attack, confirmed Fisher’s and
Reed’s account, stating that his tongue was perfectly clean, his pulse
good, but his stomach appeared distended, that he only administered
simple remedies. Cook told him he thought he had been poisoned. He
seemed a little excited, but not drunk. A _Mrs. Brooks_, who also
attends races, added the following evidence on this incident:—
“I went to the ‘Raven’ to see Palmer about half-past ten at night
on Wednesday the 15th. I went upstairs, and asked a servant to tell
Palmer that I wished to speak to him. She said he was there. At the
top of the stairs are two passages, one facing, the other to the left.
I turned to the left. I saw Palmer standing by a small table in the
passage. He had a tumbler-glass in his hand in which there appeared to
be a small quantity of water. I did not see him put anything into it.
There was a light between me and him, and he held it up to the light.
He said to me, ‘I will be with you presently.’ He saw me the moment I
got to the top of the stairs. He stood at the table a minute or two
longer with the glass in his hand, holding it up to the light and
shaking it. The door of a sitting-room was partially open, and he went
into it, taking the glass with him. In two or three minutes he came
out again with the glass. What was in it was still of the colour of
water. He then went into his own sitting-room, and the door was shut.”
Some brandy and water, which Palmer afterwards brought to Mrs. Brooks,
proved harmless to her; but she admitted that on the previous day
a great number of the racing men at Shrewsbury were affected with
sickness and purging, and that there was a talk in the town of the
water being poisoned.[32] With the return of Cook from Shrewsbury to
Rugeley with Palmer, on the day after this suspicious attack, the
summary of the case ends, it being necessary to detail the subsequent
events in the words of the leading witnesses.
THE SYMPTOMS.
In the evening of the 15th of November, Cook returned from Shrewsbury
with Palmer to the “Talbot Arms,” at Rugeley, an inn situated
immediately opposite Palmer’s own house. He said he had been ill at
Shrewsbury, went to bed early, dined with Palmer the next day, and
returned to the inn at night, apparently none the worse, and quite
sober.
“On the following morning,” said _Mills_, the chambermaid, “Palmer
came to see him, and asked me for a cup of coffee for him, which I
procured, and I think I gave it to the deceased, and left the room.
I did not see him drink the coffee; but when I went into the room
shortly afterwards, I found it had been vomited in the utensil. I
did not observe a jug of toast-and-water in the bedroom; but a jug
that did not belong to the bedroom was sent down at night, for me to
make some fresh toast-and-water in it. The prisoner was in deceased’s
bedroom four or five times on this day, and I heard him tell Cook
that he would send him over some soup. I afterwards saw some broth
in the kitchen, which I knew had not been made in the Talbot Arms;
and the waitress took this broth to the deceased’s bedroom. I saw the
prisoner after this, and he asked me if Mr. Cook had had his broth;
and the waitress said she had taken it to him, but he refused to take
it, and said that it would not stay on his stomach. The prisoner then
told me to fetch the broth, as Mr. Cook must have it, and I did so,
and left it in deceased’s bedroom, and shortly afterwards I saw that
it had been vomited. The same evening some barley water was made for
the deceased, and also some arrowroot, but I cannot say whether they
remained on his stomach or not. Mr. Bamford, the doctor, was called
in after this. On the Sunday after the deceased came to the Talbot
Arms, I saw him in his bedroom about eight o’clock in the morning,
and he said he had slept well since twelve o’clock, and he felt
pretty comfortable. A large breakfast cup of broth was brought from
the prisoner’s house between twelve and one o’clock on the Sunday,
and I took it up to the deceased’s bedroom. I tasted the broth, and
very soon afterwards I was sick. I drunk about two tablespoonfuls. I
vomited violently all the afternoon, and was obliged to go to bed. I
was quite well up to the time of my drinking the broth. I saw the
deceased on Sunday evening, and he seemed in good spirits, and not to
be any worse. I saw the deceased on the Monday morning between seven
and eight o’clock, when I took him a cup of coffee for his breakfast.
He did not vomit the coffee. Palmer had seen him before this, but he
did not come again until ten o’clock at night. The deceased got up
about one o’clock, and he shaved and dressed himself, and appeared a
great deal better, but said that he was exceedingly weak. Ashmall,
the jockey, came to see him on the Monday, and also Mr. Saunders, the
trainer. Soon after one o’clock, the deceased took some arrowroot, and
it remained on his stomach. The deceased went to bed at four o’clock,
and between nine and ten the prisoner went into his room, and I left
him there. Some pills were sent by Dr. Bamford for the deceased, about
eight o’clock, and I took them into his room, and placed them on the
dressing-table, and they were there when the prisoner went into the
room. I went to bed between ten and eleven, and I was called up about
twelve. I then heard violent screams from the deceased’s bedroom, and
upon entering it _I saw the deceased sitting up in bed, and he desired
me to fetch the prisoner directly. I told him he had been sent for,
and I then walked to the bedside and found one of the pillows was
upon the floor. I picked it up and asked Mr. Cook if he would lay his
head down. At this time he was beating the bedclothes apparently in
great agony, and he told me he could not lie down, and he should be
suffocated if he did; and he then, in a loud tone, asked me again to
send for Mr. Palmer. There was a sort of jumping or jerking about his
head and neck and body all this time, and his breathing was very much
affected. He screamed three or four times while I was in the room, and
twice he called out, ‘Murder.’ He asked me to rub one of his hands,
and I found it quite stiff. It was the left hand. The fingers were
all stretched out and there was no motion in them, and they twitched
while I was rubbing the hand._ Palmer came into the room while this
was going on, and the deceased recognized him, and said, ‘Oh, Palmer,’
or ‘Oh, doctor, I shall die.’ The prisoner replied, ‘Oh, my lad,
you won’t;’ and after remaining a minute or two in the room he told
me to stay there, and went out. He returned in a very few minutes,
and he then produced some pills, and he gave the deceased a draught
in a wine-glass, after he had given him the pills. Cook said that
the pills stuck in his throat, and the prisoner told me to give him
some toast-and-water, and I did so in a teaspoon. _His head and body
continued jerking, and he seized the spoon fast between his teeth and
seemed to bite it very hard._ The deceased shortly after swallowed
the toast-and-water and the pills, and the prisoner then handed him
the draught. It had a thick heavy appearance. The deceased snapped
at the glass in the same way he did at the spoon, and he appeared
unable to control himself. _As soon as he had swallowed the draught,
he vomited it immediately, and it appeared to me to smell like opium._
The prisoner then made the remark that he hoped the pills had stayed,
and he searched the utensil in which the deceased had vomited with a
quill, and said that he could not find them; and he told me to take
the utensil away and empty it carefully, and I did so, but could not
see any trace of the pills. After this the deceased seemed a little
more easy. _The attack lasted altogether about half an hour, and
during the whole of the time he was quite conscious._ When he was
composed he asked the prisoner to feel how his heart beat; and Palmer
went to his bedside, and put his hand either to his heart, or the
side of his face, and he said it was all right. I left the deceased
about three o’clock in the morning, and at this time the prisoner
was sitting in the easy chair, and I believe he was asleep. About
six o’clock the same morning I saw the deceased again, and he told
me that Mr. Palmer had left him about a quarter past five o’clock.
_I asked him how he was, and he replied that he was no worse; and he
then asked me if I had ever seen any one in such agony as he was the
night before, and I told him I never had. He then said he was sure I
should never like to see anyone in such agony again, and I inquired
what he thought was the cause. He replied that it was through some
pills that Palmer had given him about half-past ten. The deceased was
quite composed and quiet at this time, and there was no jerking or
convulsion about him, but his eyes looked very wild._ About twelve
o’clock the deceased desired me to send the Boots over to Mr. Palmer
to know whether he might have a cup of coffee. A message was brought
back that he might, and Mr. Palmer would be over immediately. When I
took up the coffee the prisoner was in the room, and I gave him the
coffee, and he tasted it to see that it was not too strong. Mr. Jones
came to the inn about three o’clock, and I saw him in the deceased’s
room, and the prisoner after this told me that Cook had vomited the
coffee. _I saw Cook several times after this, and he appeared in very
good spirits, and talked about getting up the next morning, and wished
the barber to be sent for to shave him._ I did not see the deceased
later than half-past ten o’clock on the Tuesday night, and the
prisoner was then in his bedroom, and I gave him some toast-and-water
for the deceased, and the prisoner said he did not want anything more.
I sat up in the kitchen on purpose to see how Mr. Cook went on, and I
heard the bell of his room ring violently about ten minutes before
twelve, and went up immediately. _I found the deceased sitting up, and
Mr. Jones had his arm round his shoulders, apparently supporting him._
The deceased when he saw me, told me to fetch Palmer directly. I went
over to his house, and rang the surgery bell, and the prisoner came to
the window almost in an instant, and opened a small casement, and I
told him to come over to Mr. Cook, as he was in much the same state as
he was the night before. He made some reply, and I returned at once to
the ‘Talbot Arms,’ and in a minute or two the prisoner came into Mr.
Cook’s room. The first thing he said was that he did not think he had
ever dressed so quickly before in his life. At this time Mr. Jones was
supporting the deceased. I went out into the landing about a minute
or two, and the prisoner came out, and I observed to him that Mr.
Cook appeared in the same state as the night before, and he replied,
‘Not so ill by a fiftieth part.’ He then went to his own house, and
returned in a very short time to the deceased’s bedroom. _I then heard
the deceased ask to be turned on his right side_, and I then shortly
after heard that he was dead.”
The _cross-examination of Elizabeth Mills_ was mainly directed to three
points—(1.) The fact of Mr. Cook complaining of sore throat, but not
of difficulty in swallowing, in May, 1855, when the witness said all
that he did was to use a gargle sent by Dr. Bamford. (2.) Her omission
to tell the coroner that the broth had made her sick; that Cook had
said he became ill on taking the pills sent by Palmer; that he beat
the bedclothes, called “Murder!” and “twitched” when she rubbed his
hands. These omissions the witness accounted for by the fact that the
coroner did not ask her to detail all the symptoms she saw, but merely
required her to answer such questions as he put. On her depositions
being read, the Attorney-General proposed to call evidence to prove the
negligence and misconduct of the coroner, but the court ruled that it
was inadmissible.[33] (3.) That the witness had had several interviews
with Cook’s stepfather, Stevens, his attorney, and the chief constable,
before giving evidence—the defence imputing that they had instructed
her in the symptoms. She denied, however, any such conduct on their
part. She had heard of Dove’s case, but not read it, and Mr. Stevens
had never given her any money. An attempt to injure her moral character
in reference to a man of the name of Dutton entirely failed, and her
evidence remained substantially uncontradicted.
_Lavinia Barnes_, the waitress at the “Talbot Arms,” remembered Cook
coming there on Monday, the 12th, on his way to the races, and not
complaining of illness, and she saw him when he returned on Thursday,
the 15th, and after he came from dining at Palmer’s, on the Friday
evening, when he spoke to her, and was sober.
“On the Saturday,” continued this witness, “I saw him twice. Some
broth was sent over and taken up to him by me. He could not take it;
he was too sick. I carried it down, and put it in the kitchen. I
afterwards saw Palmer, and told him Cook was too sick to take it; he
said he must have it. Elizabeth Mills afterwards took it up again.
Mills was taken ill with violent vomiting on the Sunday between twelve
and one o’clock. She went to bed, and did not come downstairs till
four or five o’clock. I saw some broth that day in the kitchen; it was
in a sick cup, with two handles, not belonging to the house. I did
not see it brought; it was taken back to Palmer’s. On Monday morning
(19th) I saw Palmer, and he told Mills he was going to London. I saw
Cook during that day. Saunders came to see him, and took him up some
brandy-and-water. I slept that night in the next room to Cook’s.
Palmer came between eight and nine in the evening, but I did not
see if he went up to Cook’s room. (_According to Mills, Palmer had
seen Cook in the morning, and saw him again at ten at night._) About
twelve o’clock I was in the kitchen, when Cook’s bell rang violently.
I went upstairs. Cook was very ill, and asked me to send for Palmer.
_He screamed out ‘’Murder!’ He exclaimed that he was in violent
pain—that he was suffocating. His eyes were wild-looking, standing
a great way out of his head. He was beating his bed with his arms.
He cried out, ‘Christ, have mercy on my soul!’ I never saw a person
in such a state._ Having called up Mills, I left to send ‘Boots’ for
Palmer, who came, and I again went into Cook’s room. _Cook was then
more composed. He said, ‘Oh, doctor, I shall die!’ Palmer replied,
‘Don’t be alarmed, my lad._’ I saw Cook drink a dark mixture out of a
glass, but do not know who gave it him. I both heard and saw him snap
at the glass. He brought up the draught. I left him between twelve
and one, when he was more composed. On Tuesday he seemed a little
better. At night, a little before twelve, the bell rang again. I was
in the kitchen. Mills went upstairs, and I followed her, and _heard
Cook screaming_, but did not go into the room. I stood outside the
door, and saw Palmer come. He had been fetched. I said, as he passed
me, ‘Mr. Cook is ill again.’ He said, ‘Oh, is he?’ and went into the
room. He was dressed in his usual manner, and wore a black coat and
a cap.[34] She also heard him make the observation to Mills before
reported. She went to the room, but came out before Cook died.”
MEDICAL EVIDENCE.
In consequence of his severe illness, the following deposition of _Dr.
Bamford_ (an aged local practitioner) before the coroner was read:—
“I attended the late Mr. Cook, at the request of William Palmer, and
first saw him about three o’clock on Saturday, the 17th of November,
_when he was suffering from violent vomiting, the stomach being in
that irritable state, that it would not contain a teaspoonful of milk.
There was perfect moisture of the skin, and he was quite sensible._ I
prescribed medicine for him; and Mr. Palmer went up to my house and
waited until I had made it up, and then took it away. I prescribed a
saline draught, to be taken in an effervescing state. Between seven
and eight in the evening Mr. Palmer again requested me to visit Mr.
Cook. _The sickness still continued, everything he took being ejected
from his stomach._ I gave him two small pills as an opiate. Palmer
took the pills from my house. I did not accompany, nor do I know
what became of the pills. On the following morning (Sunday) Palmer
again called, and asked me to accompany him. _Mr. Cook’s sickness
still continued._ I remained about ten minutes. _Everything he took
that morning was ejected from his stomach. Everything he threw up
was as clear as water, except some coffee that he had taken._ Palmer
had administered some pills before I saw Mr. Cook on Saturday, which
had purged him several times. Between six and seven in the evening
I again visited the deceased, accompanied by Palmer. _The sickness
still continued._ I went on Monday morning between eight and nine,
and changed his medicine. I sent him a draught, which relieved his
sickness, and gave him ease. I did not see him again until Tuesday
night, when Palmer called for me. _I examined Mr. Cook, in the
presence of Mr. Jones and Mr. Palmer, and I observed a change in
him. He was irritable and troubled in his mind. His pulse was firm,
but tremulous, and between 80° and 90°. He threw himself down on the
bed, and turned his face away. He said he would have no more pills,
nor take any medicine._ After they had left the room, Palmer asked
me to make two more pills, similar to those on the previous night,
which I did, and he then asked me to write the directions on a slip
of paper, and I gave the pills to Palmer. The effervescing mixture
contained 20 grains of carbonate of potash, 2 drachms of compound
tincture of cardamine, and 2 drachms of simple syrup, together with
15 grains of tartaric acid for each powder. _I never gave Mr. Cook a
grain of antimony._ I did not see the preparations after they were
taken away. _His skin was moist, and there was not the least fever
about him._ I considered death to have been the result of congestion
of the brain, when the _post-mortem_ examination was made, and I
do not see any reason to alter that opinion. Palmer said he was of
the same opinion with respect to the death of the deceased. I never
knew apoplexy produce rigidity of the limbs. Drowsiness is a prelude
to apoplexy. _I attribute the sickness on the first two days to a
disordered stomach._” When called in the sixth day of the trial,
after his recovery, the witness said—speaking of the last visit to
Mr. Cook—“Having seen Cook, I left the room with Jones and Palmer:
the latter said he rather wished Cook to have his pills again (I had
prepared the same pills on Saturday, Sunday, and Monday), and he would
walk up with me for them. He did so, and stood by me in the surgery
while I prepared them. I had strychnia in a cupboard in my private
room. I put the pills in a box, and addressed it ‘Night pills, John
Parsons Cook, Esq.’ I wrote that direction all four nights. On the
Tuesday night Palmer requested me to put on a direction. After that I
did not see Cook alive. It was, as near as could be, twenty minutes
past twelve, at midnight, when I saw Cook dead. I understood he was
alive when they came for me, and I could not have been more than five
or ten minutes in going up. My house is about two hundred yards from
Palmer. _I found the body stretched out, resting on the heels and
the back of the head, as straight as possible, and stiff. The arms
were extended down each side of the body, and the hands clenched._ I
certified it was apoplexy.”
_Mr. William Henry Jones_, a surgeon at Lutterworth, and intimate
friend of Cook’s for the last five years, was written to by Palmer on
the Monday, the 19th, stating that “Cook was taken ill at Shrewsbury,
and obliged to call in a medical man;” that “_since then he had been
confined to his bed with a very serious bilious attack, combined with
diarrhœa_,” and that Palmer “thought it advisable that his friend
should come and see him.” Illness prevented this before about half-past
three in the afternoon of Tuesday, the day before Cook died.
“On my arrival at Rugeley,” said the witness, “I went up to Cook’s
room. He said he was very comfortable, but had been very ill at
Shrewsbury. He did not detail the symptoms, but said he had had to
call in a doctor. Palmer came in. I examined Cook in his presence.
_He had a natural pulse. I looked at his tongue; it was clean. I
said it was hardly the tongue of a bilious, diarrhœa attack. Palmer
replied, ‘You should have seen it before.’_ I did not then prescribe
for Cook. In the course of the afternoon I visited him several times.
_He changed for the better. His spirits and pulse both improved. I
gave him, at his request, some toast and water, and he vomited. There
was no diarrhœa._ The toast and water was in the room. Mr. Bamford
came in the evening, about 7 o’clock, and expressed his opinion that
Cook was going on very satisfactorily. We were talking about what he
was to have, and Cook objected to the pills of the previous night.
Palmer was there all the time. Cook said the pills made him ill. I do
not remember to whom he addressed this observation. We three (Palmer,
Bamford, and myself) went out upon the landing. Palmer proposed that
Mr. Bamford should make up some morphine pills as before, at the
same time requesting me not to mention to Cook what they contained,
as he objected to the morphine so much. Mr. Bamford agreed to this,
and he went away. I went back to Cook’s room, and Palmer went with
me. During the evening I was several times in Cook’s room. He seemed
very comfortable all the evening. _There was no more vomiting nor any
diarrhœa, but there was a natural motion in the bowels. I observed no
bilious symptoms about Cook._”
By _Lord Campbell_.—“_Did he appear to have recently suffered from a
bilious attack?_”
_Answer._—“No.”
_Examination resumed._—“Palmer and I went to his house about eight
o’clock. I remained there about half-an-hour, and then returned to
Cook. I next saw Palmer in Cook’s room at nearly eleven o’clock. He
had brought with him a box of pills. He opened the paper on which
the direction was written in my presence. That paper was round the
box. He called my attention to the paper, saying, ‘What an excellent
handwriting for an old man!’ I did not read the direction, but looked
at the writing, which was very good. Palmer proposed to Cook that he
should take the pills. Cook protested very much against it, because
they had made him so ill on the previous night. Palmer repeated the
request several times, and at last Cook complied with it, and took the
pills. _The moment he took them he vomited into the utensil._ Palmer
and myself (at Palmer’s request) searched in it for the pills, to see
whether they were returned. We found nothing but toast-and-water. I do
not know when Cook had drunk the toast-and-water, but it was standing
by the bedside all the evening. _The vomiting could not have been
caused by the contents of the pills, nor by the act of swallowing.
After vomiting Cook laid down and appeared quiet. Before Palmer came
Cook had got up and sat in a chair. His spirits were very good; he
was laughing and joking, talking of what he should do with himself
during the winter._ After he had taken the pills I went downstairs
to my supper, and returned to his room at nearly twelve o’clock. His
room was double-bedded, and it had been arranged that I should sleep
in it that night. I talked to Cook for a few minutes, and then went
to bed. When I last talked to him he was rather sleepy, but quite as
well as he had been during the evening. There was nothing about him
to excite any apprehensions. I had been in bed about ten minutes, and
had not got to sleep, when he suddenly started up in bed, and called
out, ‘Doctor, get up, I am going to be ill! Ring the bell and send
for Palmer.’ I rang the bell. The chambermaid came, and Cook called
out to her, ‘Fetch Mr. Palmer.’ He asked me to give him something.
I declined, and said, ‘Palmer will be here directly.’ Cook was then
sitting up in bed. _The room was rather dark, and I did not observe
anything particular in his countenance. He asked me to rub the back of
his neck. I did so. I supported him with my arm. There was a stiffness
about the muscles of his neck._ Palmer soon came in; two or three
minutes at the utmost after the chambermaid went for him. He said,
‘I never dressed so quickly in my life.’ I did not observe how he
was dressed. _He gave Cook two pills, which he told me were ammonia
pills. Cook swallowed them. Directly he did so he uttered loud
screams, threw himself back in the bed, and was dreadfully convulsed.
That could not have been the result of the pills last taken. He said,
‘Raise me up; I shall be suffocated.’ That was at the commencement of
the convulsions, which lasted five or ten minutes. The convulsions
affected every muscle of the body, and were accompanied by stiffening
of the limbs. I endeavoured to raise Cook with the assistance of
Palmer, but found it quite impossible, owing to the rigidity of the
limbs. When Cook found we could not raise him up, he asked to be
turned over. He was then quite sensible. I turned him on his side._ I
listened to the action of the heart. I found it gradually weakened,
and asked Palmer to fetch some spirits of ammonia, to be used as a
stimulant. He went to his house and fetched a bottle. He was away a
very short time. When he returned the pulsations of the heart were
gradually ceasing, and life was almost extinct. He died very quietly a
short time afterwards.
“_From the time he called to me to the time of his death there elapsed
about ten minutes or a quarter of an hour. He died of tetanus_, which
is a spasmodic affection of the muscles of the whole body. It causes
death by stopping the action of the heart. The sense of suffocation is
caused by the contraction of the respiratory muscles. The room was so
dark that I could not observe the outward appearance of Cook’s body
after death. _When he threw himself back in bed he clenched his teeth,
and they remained clenched after his death. When I was rubbing his
neck, his head and neck were unnaturally bent back by the spasmodic
action of the muscles. After his death his body was so twisted or
bowed that if I had placed it upon the back it would have rested on
the head and feet._”
By _Lord Campbell_.—“_When did you first observe the bowing and
twisting?_”
_Witness._—“_When Cook threw himself back on the bed. The jaw was
affected by the spasmodic action._”
The _cross-examination_ of this witness was directed to the previous
health of the deceased, and to his fears that he was still suffering
from a former attack of venereal disease, which Mr. Jones decidedly
negatived; to his having been in pecuniary difficulties from his racing
ventures, which the witness said he was steadily redeeming; to Cook’s
objection to take morphia; to the question whether, when before the
coroner, the witness had used the word “tetanus,” which it was evident
from the original depositions had been scratched out by the clerk,
probably from ignorance of its meaning, and to whether he agreed with
Dr. Bamford that Cook had died in an apoplectic fit, or rather, as
the witness at the time thought, of one of an epileptic character. In
_re-examination_, he said that “_he was satisfied that Cook’s death
did not arise from epilepsy, as in that disease consciousness is lost,
but there is no rigidity or convulsive spasm of the muscles, and the
symptoms quite different. He was equally certain that it did not arise
from apoplexy._” _Dr. Savage_, of Gloucester Place, London, who had
attended Cook for four years, also negatived the suggestion that he was
suffering from syphilitic symptoms, or that he had any venereal taint
about him. He was timid, no doubt, about his throat, and had had two
small ulcers on his tongue due to two bad teeth, but by the end of May
they had gradually disappeared, and were quite well.
The woman who laid out the body noticed that “_though it was quite
warm, the hands and arms were cold; the body lying on the back,
straight down the bed,[35] the arms crossed upon the chest, and the
head ‘lying a little turned on one side.’” She had never seen so stiff
a corpse before. “We,” she continued, “had difficulty in straightening
the arms. We could not keep them straight down to the body. I passed
a piece of tape under the back, and tied it round the wrists, to
fasten the arms down. The right foot turned on one side outwards. We
were obliged to tie both feet together. The eyes were open. We were
a considerable time before we could close them, because the eyelids
were so stiff. The hands were closed, and were very stiff. I have
never known them so stiff as in this case._” _Mr. Stevens_, Cook’s
stepfather, who saw the body three days after death, also noted that
the right hand was clenched, and, as he looked across the body, that
the left was clenched in the same way.
What passed between _Mr. Stevens_ and Palmer at their interview at
Rugeley on the Friday after Cook’s death, and the reasons why he
eventually insisted on a _post-mortem_ examination and a chemical
analysis of the corpse, belong rather to the section relating to the
conduct of the prisoner. It will be sufficient here to note that on
the 26th of November the _post-mortem_ examination was held with
the following results by Dr. Harland, of Stafford, assisted by Mr.
Devonshire, of the London University, and Mr. Newton, of Rugeley, in
the presence of Dr. Bamford, Palmer, and several other persons.
_POST-MORTEM_ EXAMINATION.
_Dr. John Thomas Harland_, physician, of Stafford, arrived at Rugeley
at ten in the morning of the 26th, called at Dr. Bamford’s on his
way to the hotel where the examination was to be conducted, and on
his road met Palmer, whom he had previously known. “I am glad,” said
Palmer, “that you are come to make a _post-mortem_ examination. Someone
might have been sent whom I did not know.” “What is the case?” replied
Harland; “I hear there is a suspicion of poisoning.” “Oh no,” said
Palmer; “_he had an epileptic fit on Monday and Tuesday last, and
you will find old disease in the heart and head_.” Such was not the
result of the _post-mortem_. They “found the body much stiffer than
bodies usually are five or six days after death—the muscles strongly
contracted and thrown out, and the hands stiff and firmly closed.”
According to a report which Dr. Harland sent to Mr. Stevens, and which
at the suggestion of the judge was read in full, the various internal
organs were perfectly healthy and natural, as described in detail in
the following examination, subsequent to reading the report:—
“The abdominal viscera were in a perfectly healthy state. They were
taken out of the body. We examined the liver. It was healthy. The
lungs were healthy, but contained a good deal of blood; not more than
would be accounted for by gravitation after death. We examined the
head. The brain was quite healthy. There was no extravasation of
blood, and no serum. There was nothing which, in my judgment, could
cause pressure. The heart was contracted, and contained no blood.
That was the result, not of disease, but of spasmodic action. At the
larger end of the stomach there were numerous small yellowish-white
spots, about the size of mustard seeds. They would not at all account
for death. I doubt whether they would have any effect upon the health.
I think they were mucous follicles. The kidneys were full of blood
which had gravitated there. They had no appearance of disease. The
blood was in a fluid state. That was not usual. It is found so in some
cases of sudden death, which are of rare occurrence. The lower part of
the spinal cord was not very closely examined. We examined the upper
part of that cord. It presented a perfectly natural appearance. On
a subsequent day, I think the 25th of January, it was thought right
to exhume the body, that the spinal cord might be more carefully
examined. I was present at that examination. The lower part of the
spinal cord was then minutely examined. A report was made of that
examination.”
This report was put in, and was read by the witness. It described
minutely the appearance and condition of the spinal cord and its
envelopes, and concluded with this statement:—“There is nothing in
the condition of the spinal cord or its envelopes to account for
death; nothing but the most normal and healthy state, allowance being
made for the lapse of time since the death of the deceased.”
_Examination resumed._—“I am still of opinion that there was nothing
in the appearance of the spine to account for the death of the
deceased, and nothing of an unusual kind which might not be referred
to changes after death. When the stomach and intestines were removed
from the body on the occasion of the first examination they were
separately emptied into a jar, and were afterwards placed in it.
Mr. Devonshire and Mr. Newton removed them from the body. They were
the only two who operated. At the time the prisoner was standing
on the right of Mr. Newton. While Mr. Devonshire was opening the
stomach a push was given by Palmer, which sent Mr. Newton against Mr.
Devonshire, and shook some of the contents of the stomach into the
body. I thought a joke was passing among them, and said, ‘Don’t do
that.’”
By _Lord Campbell_.—“Might not Palmer have been impelled by some one
outside him?”
_Answer._—“There was no one who could have impelled him.”
_Question._—“What did you observe Palmer do?”
_Answer._—“I saw Mr. Newton and Mr. Devonshire pushed together, and
Palmer was over them. He was smiling at the time.”
_Examination continued._—“After this interruption the opening of
the stomach was pursued. The stomach contained about three ounces
of a brownish fluid. There was nothing particular in that. Palmer
was looking on, and said, ‘They won’t hang us yet.’ He said that to
Mr. Bamford in a loud whisper. That remark was made upon his own
observation of the stomach. The stomach after being emptied, was
put into the jar. The intestines were then examined, but nothing
particular was found in them. They were contracted and very small.
The viscera, with their contents, as taken from the body, were placed
in the jar, which was then covered over with two bladders, which were
tied and sealed. I tied and sealed them. After I had done so I placed
the jar upon the table by the body. Palmer was then moving about the
room. In a few minutes I missed the jar from where I had placed it.
During that time my attention had been withdrawn by the examination.
On missing the jar I called out, ‘Where’s the jar?’ and Palmer from
the other end of the room, said, ‘It is here; I thought it would be
more convenient for you to take away.’ There was a door at the end of
the room where he was. He was within a yard or two of that door, and
about twenty-four feet from the table on which the body was lying.”
(Before making this last statement the witness referred to a plan of
the room which was put in by the Attorney-General.) “The other door
near which Palmer was standing was not the one by which he entered
the room. I called to Palmer, ‘Will you bring it here?’ I went from
the table and met Palmer half-way coming with the jar. _Since I last
saw it it had been cut through both bladders. The cut was hardly an
inch long, done with a sharp instrument._ I examined the jar. The
edges were quite clean; no part of the contents could have passed
through it. Finding this cut, I said, ‘Here is a cut! who has done
it?’ Palmer, Devonshire, and Newton, all said they had not done it,
and nothing more was said. When I was about to remove the jar from the
room, the prisoner asked me what I was going to do with it. I said I
should take it to Mr. Frere’s (a neighbouring surgeon). He said, ‘I
would rather you would take it to Stafford than take it there.’ I made
no answer that I remember. On finding the slit, I cut the strings,
and altered the bladder, so that the slits were not over the top. I
took it to Mr. Frere’s, and left it in his hall, tied and sealed.
Afterwards when I went for my carriage, whilst waiting in the yard,
the prisoner came and asked me what would be done with it, and I
said, ‘Sent either to Birmingham or London for examination.’ When I
recovered the jar, I tied each corner separately and resealed it with
my own seal. During the first _post-mortem_ examination, there were
several Rugeley persons present, but, I believe, no one on behalf of
the prisoner. At the second examination there was some one on behalf
of Palmer (_Mr. Pemberton_ and _Mr. Bolton_).”
On _cross-examination_, after stating that Palmer’s words, “they
won’t hang us yet,” were addressed to Bamford in a loud whisper, and
afterwards repeated to several persons, and that his original notes in
pencil were destroyed, a more formal report being written by him on
getting home, _Dr. Harland_ said—
“At the base of the tongue of the deceased I observed some enlarged
mucous follicles; they were not pustules containing matter, but
enlarged mucous follicles of long standing. There were a good
many of them, but I do not suppose that they would occasion much
inconvenience. They might cause some degree of pain, but it would
be slight. I do not believe they were enlarged glands. I should not
say that the deceased’s lungs were diseased, although they were not
in their normal state. The lungs were full of blood and the heart
empty. I had no lens at the _post-mortem_ examination, but I made
an examination which was satisfactory without one. The brain was
carefully taken out; the membranes and external parts were first
examined, and thin slices about a quarter of an inch in thickness
were taken off and subjected to separate examination. I think that by
that means we should have discovered disease if any had existed; and
if there had been any indication of disease I should have examined it
more carefully. _I examined the spinal cord as far down as possible,
and if there had been any appearance of disease, I should have opened
the canal. There was no appearance of disease, however. We opened
down to the first vertebra. If we had found a softening of the spinal
cord, I do not think that it would have been sufficient to have caused
Mr. Cook’s death; certainly not. A softening of the spinal cord would
not produce tetanus; it might produce paralysis. I do not think, as a
medical man investigating the cause of death, that it was necessary
carefully to examine the spinal cord. I do not know who suggested that
there should be an examination of the spinal cord two months after
death. There were some appearances of decomposition when we examined
the spinal cord, but I do not think that there was sufficient to
interfere with our examination._[36] I examined the body to ascertain
if there was any trace of venereal disease. I did find certain
indications of that description, and the marks of an old excoriation,
which was cicatrized over.”
_Re-examined by the Attorney-General._—“There were no indications
of wounds or sores such as could by possibility produce tetanus.
There was no disease of the lungs to account for death. The heart
was healthy, and its emptiness I attribute to spasmodic action. The
heart being empty, of course death ensued. The convulsive spasmodic
action of the muscles of the body, which was deposed to yesterday by
Mr. Jones, would, in my judgment occasion the emptiness of the heart.
There was nothing whatever in the brain to indicate the presence of
any disease of any sort; but if there had been, I never heard or read
of any disease of the brain ever producing tetanus. _There was no
relaxation of the spinal cord which would account for the symptoms
accompanying Mr. Cook’s death as they have been described. In fact,
there was no relaxation of the spinal cord at all, and there is no
disease of the spinal cord with which I am acquainted which would
produce tetanus._”
_Dr. Monckton_, a physician at Rugeley, made a separate examination
of the spinal marrow of the deceased on the 28th of January, when he
said that the body was in such a condition as to enable him to do
so satisfactorily, and when had there been any disease of a normal
character on the spine he should have had no difficulty in discovering
it. All that he found were certain granules, the origin of which it
was difficult to account for, though frequently found in persons of
an advanced age, but which he never knew to occasion sudden death. He
agreed entirely with the evidence of Dr. Harland.[37]
EVIDENCE OF MEDICAL EXPERTS.
We come next to a remarkable body of evidence given by men of such
eminence in their profession as Mr. Curling, Dr. Todd, Sir Benjamin
Brodie, and others of nearly equal mark, negativing the idea that had
been suggested in the previous cross-examinations that the death was
due to one of the two forms of true _tetanus_, and affirming that the
symptoms which had been detailed were those of the action of strychnia.
Not only were these opinions closely questioned in cross-examination,
but as many medical men, several of them of not less eminence
than these witnesses, were subsequently called for the defence to
contradict them; and thus the most extraordinary conflict of scientific
evidence raised that had hitherto been witnessed in a criminal court.
Subsequently, as we shall see, a similar dispute between the medical
giants of the day was roused in the case of Dr. Smethurst, but with, in
the end, a very different result. In reading the following statements
for the prosecution, it will help to make them more clear, if it is
borne in mind that _tetanus_ is of two kinds—(1), _Idiopathic_, or
self-generated, and the other (2), _Traumatic_, the result of a wound
or a sore; that the former may arise from exposure to cold or damp,
or even from the irritation of worms in the alimentary canal, but
in temperate climates is by no means a frequent disease; whilst the
latter, from the various accidents to which human beings are liable, is
of more frequent occurrence. Another point to be remembered is, that it
is a moot point in medical practice whether a syphilitic sore, unless
of course of a most aggravated character, will produce _tetanus_, and
that the difference between the symptoms and progress of _true tetanus_
and of that due to poison is, in the opinion of these experts, very
marked. _Dr. James Blizard Curling_, surgeon to the London Hospital,
was first called, and after describing the two kinds of _tetanus_
and their causes, and speaking of the very numerous cases of the
“traumatic” kind which he had seen, he thus detailed the symptoms:—
“The disease first manifests itself about the jaws and neck. Rigidity
of the muscles of the abdomen afterwards sets in. A dragging pain
at the pit of the stomach is almost a constant attendant. In many
instances the muscles of the back are extensively affected. These
symptoms, though continuous, are liable to aggravations into
paroxysms. As the disease goes on these paroxysms become more frequent
and more severe. When they occur the body is drawn backwards; in some
instances, though less frequent, it is bent forward. A difficulty
in swallowing is a very common symptom, and also a difficulty of
breathing during the paroxysms. The disease may, if fatal, end in
two ways. The patient may die somewhat suddenly, from suffocation,
owing to the closure of the opening of the windpipe; or he may be
worn out by the severe and painful spasms, the muscles may relax,
and the patient gradually sink. The disease is generally fatal. _The
locking of the jaw is an almost constant symptom attending ‘traumatic
tetanus;’ I may say a constant symptom. It is not always marked,
but generally so. It is an early symptom._ Another symptom is a
peculiar expression of countenance. I believe this is not peculiar
to ‘_traumatic tetanus_,’ but my observation is from such cases.
There is a contraction of the eyelids, a raising of the angles of the
mouth, and contraction of the brow. In ‘_traumatic tetanus_’ the lower
extremities are sometimes affected, and sometimes, but rarely, the
upper ones. When the muscles of the extremities are affected, the time
at which that occurs varies. If there is no wound in the arms or legs,
the extremities are generally not affected until late in the progress
of the disease. _I never knew of tetanus being produced by a sore
throat or a chancre. In my opinion a syphilitic sore would not produce
tetanus. I know of no instance in which one has led to tetanus. I
think it a very unlikely cause._ The time within which ‘_traumatic
tetanus_’ causes death varies from twenty-four hours to two or three
days or longer. The shortest time to my knowledge was eight to ten
hours. _When once commenced, the disease is continuous._”
_Question._—“Did you ever hear of a case in which a man was attacked
one day, had twenty-four hours’ respite, and was then attacked the
next day?”
_Witness._—“Never. Such a case could not occur.”
_Question._—“You have heard Mr. Jones’s account of the death of
the deceased. _Were the symptoms there consistent with any forms of
traumatic tetanus?_”
_Witness._—“_No._”
_Question._—“_What distinguishes it from such causes?_”
_Witness._—“_The sudden onset of the disease._ In all cases that
have come under my observation the disease was preceded by the
milder symptoms of _tetanus_, gradually proceeding to the complete
development.”
_Question._—“_Were the symptoms described by Mills those of tetanus?_”
_Witness._—“_No. Not of tetanus of disease._”
_Question._—“Assuming tetanus to be synonymous with convulsive or
spasmodic action of the muscles, was there, in that sense, _tetanus_
on Monday night?”
_Witness._—“No doubt there was spasmodic action of the muscles, but
not _idiopathic_ or _traumatic tetanus_, because the sudden onset of
the spasms, and their rapid subsidence, are consistent with neither of
the two forms of _tetanus_.”
_Question._—“Is there not _hysteric tetanus_?”
_Witness._—“Yes: it is rather _hysteria_ combined with spasms, but
it is sometimes called _hysteric tetanus_. I have known no instance
of its proving fatal, or of it occurring to a man. Some poisons will
produce _tetanus_. Nux vomica, acting through its poisons, strychnia
and brucia, poisons of a cognate character, produce that effect. I
never saw human or animal life destroyed by strychnia.”
In his _cross-examination_, Mr. Curling admitted that irritation of
the spinal cord, or of the nerves proceeding to it, might produce
_tetanus_, and the correctness of Dr. Watson’s statements in his
Lectures, that, in four cases out of five, the disease begins with
lockjaw, and that all the symptoms of tetanic convulsions may arise
from very trivial blows; but he denied that there was any well
authenticated instance of “_traumatic tetanus_” occurring within a
quarter of an hour after the reception of the injury, or that it was
very likely that the irritation of a syphilitic sore by wet, cold,
drink, mercury, or mental excitement, might lead to _tetanic_ symptoms.
“The irritation,” said Mr. Curling, “which is likely to produce
_tetanus_ is the sore being exposed to friction, to which syphilitic
sores in the throat are not exposed. I should class _tetanus_ arising
from the irritation of a sore as _traumatic_. Cases very rarely occur
which it is difficult to class as either _traumatic_ or _idiopathic_.
I should class _tetanus_ arising from irritation of the intestines as
_idiopathic_. The character of the spasms of epilepsy are not tetanic.”
_Serjeant Shee._—“Not of the spasms; but are not the contractions of
epilepsy sometimes continuous, so that the body may be twisted into
various forms, and remain rigidly in them?”
_Answer._—“Not continuously.”
_Question._—“For five or ten minutes together?”
_Answer._—“I think not.”
_Question._—“Does it not frequently happen that general convulsions,
no cause or trace of which in the form of disease or lesion is to be
found in the body after death, occur in the most violent and spastic
way so as to exhibit appearances of tetanic convulsions?”
_Answer._—“No instance of the kind has come under my observation.”[38]
_Question._—“Do you agree with this opinion of Dr. Copland, expressed
in his _Dictionary of Practical Medicine_, under the head of ‘General
Convulsions,’ ‘The abnormal contraction of the muscles is in some
cases of the most violent and spastic nature, and frequently of some
continuance, the relaxations being of brief duration or scarcely
observable, and in others nearly or altogether approaching to
tetanic?’”
_Answer._—“I would rather speak from my own observation. I have not
observed anything of the kind.”
_Question._—“Does it not happen that a patient dies of convulsions,
spasmodic in the sense of their being tumultuous and alternating, and
chronic in the sense of exhibiting continuous rigidity, yet after
death no disease is found?”
_Answer._—“It does not often happen to adults.”
_Question._—“Does it sometimes?”
_Answer._—“I do not know, nor have I read of such a case. I have no
hesitation in saying that people may die from _tetanus_ and other
diseases without the appearance of morbid symptoms after death.”
_Question._—“Are not convulsions, not, strictly speaking, tetanic,
constantly preceded by retching, distention of the stomach, flatulence
of the stomach and bowels, and other dyspeptic symptoms?”
_Answer._—“Such cases do not come under my observation as a hospital
surgeon. I think it is very probable that general convulsions are
accompanied by yelling. I don’t know that they frequently terminate
fatally, and that the proximate cause of death is spasm of the
respiratory muscles, inducing asphyxia.”
_Re-examined by the Attorney-General._—“These convulsions are easily
distinguished from tetanus, because in them there is an entire loss of
consciousness.”
_Question._—“Is it one of the characteristic features of _tetanus_
that the consciousness is not affected?”
_Answer._—“It is.”
_Dr. Todd_, for twenty-one years physician to King’s College Hospital,
well known for his lectures on _Tetanus_ and the diseases of the
Nervous System, and who had seen only two cases of what appeared to him
to be _idiopathic tetanus_, so rare are they in this country, gave the
following evidence:[39]—
“In my opinion the term _tetanus_ ought not to be applied to disease
produced by poisons, but I should call the symptoms tetanic in order
to distinguish the character of the convulsions. I have observed cases
of _traumatic tetanus_. Except that in all such cases there is some
lesion the symptoms are precisely the same as those of _idiopathic
tetanus_. The disease begins with stiffness about the jaw. The
symptoms gradually develope themselves and extend to the muscles of
the trunk.”
_Question._—“When the disease has begun is there any intermission?”
_Answer._—“There are remissions, but they are not complete; only
diminutions of the severity of the symptoms, not a total subsidence.
The patient does not express himself as completely well, quite
comfortable. I speak from my own experience.”
_Question._—“What is the usual period that elapses between the
commencement and the termination of the disease?”
_Answer._—“The cases may be divided into two classes. Acute cases
will terminate in three or four days, chronic cases will go on as
long as from nineteen to twenty-two or twenty-three days, and perhaps
longer. I do not think that I have known a case in which death
occurred within four days. Cases are reported in which it occurred in
a shorter period. In _tetanus_ the extremities are affected, but not
so much as the trunk. Their affection is a late symptom. _The locking
of the jaw is an early one._ Sometimes the convulsions of epilepsy
assume somewhat of a tetanic character, but they are essentially
distinct from tetanus. _In epilepsy the patient always loses
consciousness._ Apoplexy never produces tetanic convulsions. Perhaps
I may be allowed to say that when there is an effusion of blood upon
the brain, and a particular portion of the brain is involved, the
muscles may be thrown into short tetanic convulsions. In such a case
the consciousness would be destroyed. Having heard described the
symptoms attending the death of the deceased, and the _post-mortem_
examination, _I am of opinion that in this case there was neither
apoplexy nor epilepsy_.”
The deposition of Dr. Bamford, before reported, was here read, his
inability to attend from illness having been proved.
The _examination_ of Dr. Todd by the _Attorney-General_ was then
proceeded with as follows:—
“Having heard the deposition of Dr. Bamford read, _I do not believe
that the deceased died from apoplexy or from epilepsy. I never knew
tetanus arise either from syphilitic sores or from sore throat._ There
are poisons which will produce tetanic convulsions. The principal
of these poisons are nux vomica and those which contain as their
active ingredients strychnia and brucia. I have never seen human
life destroyed by strychnia, but I have seen animals destroyed by it
frequently. The poison is usually given in a largish dose in those
cases, so as to put an end to the sufferings and destroy life as soon
as possible. I should not like to give a human subject a quarter of a
grain. I think that it is not unlikely that half a grain might destroy
life; and I believe that a grain certainly would. I think that half
a grain would kill a cat. The symptoms which would ensue upon the
administration of strychnine when given in solution—and I believe
that poisons of that nature act more rapidly in a state of solution
than in any other form—would develope themselves in ten minutes
after it was taken, if the dose was a large one; if not so large,
they might be half an hour or an hour before they appeared. _Those
symptoms would be tetanic convulsions of the muscles—more especially
those of the spine and neck; the head and back would be bent back,
and the trunk would be bowed in a marked manner; the extremities also
would be stiffened and jerked out. The stiffness, once set in, would
never entirely disappear; but fresh paroxysms would set in, and the
jerking would reappear, and death would probably ensue in a quarter of
an hour or so. The difference between tetanus produced by strychnia
and other tetanus is very marked. In the former case the duration
of the symptoms is very short, and instead of being continuous in
their development, they will subside if the dose has not been strong
enough to produce death, and will be renewed in fresh paroxysms:
whereas in other descriptions of tetanus the symptoms commence in
a mild form, and become stronger and more violent as the disease
progresses._ The difficulty experienced in breathing is common alike
to _tetanus_ properly so called, and to tetanic convulsions occasioned
by strychnia, arising from the pressure on the respiratory muscles.
I think it is remarkable that the deceased was able to swallow, and
that there was no fixing of the jaw, which would have been the case
with _tetanus_ proper, resulting either from a wound or from disease.
_From all the evidence that I have heard, I think that the symptoms
which presented themselves in the case of Mr. Cook arose from tetanus
produced by strychnia._”
_Cross-examined by Mr. Grove, Q.C._—“There are cases sloping
into each other, as it were, of every grade and degree, from mild
convulsions to tetanic spasms. I have published some lectures upon
diseases of the brain, and I adhere to the opinion there expressed,
that the state of a person suffering from _tetanus_ is identical with
that which strychnia is capable of producing. _In a pathological
point of view, an examination of the spinal cord shortly after death,
in investigating supposed deaths from strychnia, is important. The
signs of decomposition, however, could be easily distinguished from
the evidence of disease which existed previously to death, but
it would be difficult to distinguish in such a case whether mere
softening resulted from decomposition or from pre-existing disease._
There is nothing in the _post-mortem_ examination that leads me to
think that the deceased died from _tetanus_ proper. _I think that
granules upon the spinal cord, such as I have heard described, would
not be likely to cause tetanus._ In animals to which strychnia has
been administered I cannot say that I have observed what you call
an intolerance of touch, but by touching them spasms are apt to be
excited. That sensibility to touch continues as long as the operation
of the poison continues. I have examined the interior of animals
that have been killed by strychnia, but I have not observed in such
cases that the right side of the heart was usually full of blood.
It is some years since I made such an examination, but I am able,
nevertheless, to speak positively as to the state of the heart. _It is
usually empty on both sides._ I do not agree with Dr. Taylor, or other
authorities, that, in cases of _tetanus_, animals died asphyxiated.
If they did, we should invariably have the right side of the heart
full of blood, which is not the case. I think the term asphyxiated is
sometimes very loosely used. I know, from my reading, _that morphia
sometimes produces convulsions, but believe they would be of an
epileptic character. I think that the symptoms of morphia would be
longer deferred in making their appearance than from strychnia_, but
cannot speak positively on the point. Morphia, like strychnia, is a
vegetable poison. I have not observed in animals the jaw fixed after
the administration of strychnia.”
_Re-examined by the Attorney-General._—“Whatever may be the true
theory as to the emptiness of the heart after strychnia, I should say
that the heart is more ordinarily empty than filled after _tetanus_,
and more contracted after strychnia, than in ordinary _tetanus_. I do
not believe that a medical practitioner would have any difficulty in
distinguishing between ordinary convulsions and tetanic convulsions.
I have heard the evidence of the gentlemen who made the _post-mortem_
examination, and I apprehend that there was nothing to prevent the
discovery of disease in the spinal cord had any existed previously to
death.”
_Sir Benjamin Brodie’s_ evidence, which follows, was given “with great
clearness, slowly, audibly, and distinctly,” and produced a marked
effect.
_Sir Benjamin Brodie, examined by Mr. James, Q.C._—“I have been for
many years senior surgeon to St. George’s Hospital, and have had
considerable experience as a surgeon. In the course of my practice
I have had under my care many cases of death from _tetanus_. Death
from _idiopathic tetanus_ is, according to my experience, very
rare in this country. The ordinary _tetanus_ in this country is
_traumatic tetanus_. I have heard the symptoms which accompanied
the death of Mr. Cook, and I am of opinion that so far as there
was a general contraction of the muscles they resembled those of
_traumatic tetanus_; but, as to the course those symptoms took,
they were entirely different. I have attended to the detailed
description of the attack suffered by Mr. Cook on the Monday night,
its ceasing on Tuesday, and its renewal on the Tuesday night. The
symptoms of _traumatic tetanus_ always begin, so far as I have seen,
very gradually, the stiffness of the lower jaw being, I believe,
invariably, the symptom first complained of—at least, so it has been
in my experience. The contraction of the muscles of the back is always
a later symptom—generally much later. The muscles of the extremities
are affected in a much less degree than those of the neck and trunk,
except in some cases where the injury has been in a limb, and an early
symptom has been spasmodic contraction of the muscles of that limb. I
do not myself recollect a case of ordinary _tetanus_ in which occurred
that contraction in the muscles of the hand which I understand
was stated to have taken place in this instance. Again, ordinary
_tetanus_ rarely runs its course in less than two or three days, and
often is protracted to a much longer period. I knew one case only in
which the disease was said to have terminated in so short a time as
twelve hours; but probably in that case the early symptoms had been
overlooked. Again, I never knew the symptoms of ordinary _tetanus_
to last for a few minutes, then subside, and then come on again
after twenty-four hours. I think that these are the principal points
of difference which I perceived between the symptoms of ordinary
_tetanus_ and those which I have heard described in this case. I have
not witnessed tetanic convulsions from strychnia on animal life. I
do not believe that death in the case of Mr. Cook arose from what we
ordinarily call _tetanus—either idiopathic or traumatic. I never knew
tetanus result from sore throat or from a chancre, or from any other
form of syphilitic disease. The symptoms were not the result either of
apoplexy or of epilepsy. Perhaps I had better say at once that I never
saw a case in which the symptoms that I have heard described here
rose from any disease._ (Sensation.) _When I say that, of course I
refer not to particular symptoms, but to the general course which the
symptoms took._”
_Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee._—“I believe I remember one case
in the physician’s ward of St. George’s Hospital, which was shown to
me as a case of _idiopathic tetanus_, but I doubted whether it was
_tetanus_ at all. It was a slight case, and I do not remember the
particulars.”
_Question._—“Considering how rare cases of _tetanus_ are, do you
think that the description given by a chambermaid and a provincial
medical man, who had never seen but one case, is sufficient to enable
you to form an opinion as to the nature of the case?”
_Answer._—“I must say I thought that the description was very clearly
given.”
_Question._—“Supposing that they differed in their description, which
would you rely upon—the medical man or the chambermaid?”
_Lord Campbell._—“That is hardly a proper question.”
_Baron Alderson._—“It may be a very proper observation for you to
make.”
_Cross-examination continued._—“I never knew syphilitic poison
produce tetanic convulsions, except in cases where there was disease
of the bones of the head.”
Two other surgeons, _Dr. Daniell_, late surgeon to the British
Hospital, and _Mr. Samuel Solly_, of St. Thomas’s Hospital, confirmed
in every respect the views of the previous medical witnesses, that
the circumstances attending Cook’s death were clearly distinguishable
from those attendant on ordinary _tetanus_. They relied on the fact
that ordinary _tetanus_ was always progressive, and that it is never
intermittent to the extent witnessed in Cook’s case, and seldom endured
less than from thirty to forty hours. Mr. Solly alluded to the peculiar
grin—“the _risus Sardonicus_, as the first symptom of _true tetanus_,
which is not common to all convulsions, and which having once seen,”
he said, “you cannot forget.” He distinguished between _tetanus_ with
convulsions and death from epileptic convulsions by the fact that “the
first seldom leaves any trace behind it, whilst the latter does leave
its trace in the shape of a slight effusion of blood on the brain,
and a congestion of the vessels.” The syphilitic theory was finally
overthrown by the testimony of _Mr. Henry Lee_, surgeon to the Lock
Hospital, which is exclusively devoted to syphilitic cases. Though he
saw there nearly 3000 cases a year, he had never known one resulting in
_tetanus_, or read of a case of primary or secondary symptoms having
that result.
In addition to these experts, on the sixth day important evidence was
given by _Dr. Jackson_, who had had twenty-five years’ experience of
_tetanus_ in India, on the difference of the symptoms observed in
the _idiopathic_ and _traumatic_ kinds; the former being much more
frequent in India than in other climates, affording him in his practice
as many as forty cases.
“It is as equally fatal,” said Dr. Jackson, “according to my
experience, as _traumatic_. It is frequently found, in India, in
children, both natives and Europeans, and generally takes place
the third day after birth. It will also be occasioned by cold in
that climate. In infants there is a more marked symptom of lockjaw
in _idiopathic tetanus_. In adults there is no difference in the
symptoms from _traumatic_. I have always seen the _idiopathic_ form
preceded by premonitory symptoms, such as a peculiar expression of the
countenance, stiffness of the muscles of the throat and of the jaw.
The usual period from the attack to death in infants is forty-eight
hours; in adults, when arising from cold, it is of longer duration,
and may continue for many days, going through the same grades as the
_traumatic_ forms.”
_Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee._—“The patient always appears
to be very uncomfortable shortly before an attack of _idiopathic
tetanus_. His appetite would not be affected, but he would chiefly
complain of the muscles of the neck. He might entertain a desire
for food, and take it as usual within twelve hours of the attack.
I never heard a patient complain of want of appetite. Within the
twelve hours I should say that the patient’s attention would be more
directed to the stiffness of his mouth and neck. I have known cases of
_idiopathic tetanus_, where the first paroxysm was in bed. Difficulty
of swallowing is another premonitory symptom.”
_Re-examined by the Attorney-General._—“In the case of a child not
more than six hours would elapse between the premonitory symptoms and
the tetanic convulsions; in an adult the period would not be greater
than twenty-four hours. The duration of the disease generally varies
from three to ten days, but death has occurred as early as two days.
The _traumatic_ and _idiopathic_ cases are alike in these respects.
Both forms of the disorder are much more common in India than they
are in this country. The symptoms are not more severe. _In all my
experience I never saw a case in which the disease ran its course in
twenty minutes._”
LATE EXAMPLES OF DEATH BY STRYCHNIA.
Four cases of undoubted poisoning by strychnia were brought forward
by the prosecution, in each of which the symptoms had been observed
by medical men, as well as by the attendants on the several patients.
In the _first_ case, that of Agnes Sennett, or French, a patient in
the Glasgow Infirmary, in September, 1845, for a sore skin, from
thoughtlessness apparently, she took one of two strychnia pills
prepared for a paralytic patient, and then went and sat by the ward
fire. “In three quarters of an hour,” said _Kelly_, another patient,
“she was taken ill and fell back on the floor. I went for the nurse; we
took her to bed, and sent for the doctor; we were obliged to cut her
clothes off first because she never moved. She was like a poker. She
never spoke till she died.” Each pill, according to the prescription,
contained a quarter of a grain of strychnia. When the medical clerk of
the hospital saw her in bed, the symptoms were—
“_A strong retraction of the mouth; the face much suffused and red;
the pupils of the eyes dilated; the head bent back; the spine curved,
and the muscles rigid and hard as a board; the arms stretched out; the
hands clinched; and there were severe paroxysms occurring in about a
quarter of an hour. She died in about an hour and a quarter._ When I
was called the paroxysms did not last so long; but they increased in
severity.” “_The retraction of the mouth was continuous, but worse
at times._ I do not think I observed it after death. _The hands were
not clinched after death; they were semi-bent._ The symptoms appeared
about thirty minutes after taking the pills. I tried to make her vomit
with a feather. She only vomited partially after I had given her an
emetic. _There was spasmodic action and grinding of the teeth. She
could open her mouth and swallow. There was no lockjaw or ordinary
tetanus._”[40]
_Dr. Watson_, the surgeon to the infirmary, who was called in within
a quarter of an hour of the patient being taken ill, said, “_She was
in violent convulsions, and her arms stretched out and rigid; they
were kept quiet by rigidity. She did not breathe, the muscles being
kept still by tetanic rigidity._ That paroxysm subsided, and fresh
ones came on after a short interval. She died in about half an hour.
She was perfectly conscious. Her body was opened. _The heart was found
distended and stiff. The cavities of it were empty._ The spinal cord
was healthy.”
The _second_ case, also of accidental poisoning, by the error of a
local chemist, who substituted strychnia for salicine (willow bark), of
which there ought to have been nine grains in the bottle of medicine,
was that of a Mrs. Sergeantson Smyth, residing near Romsey. On the 30th
of October, 1848, she took half a wine-glass of the mixture, equal to
a third of the whole, containing three grains of strychnia. The effect
was of course immediate. The symptoms were identical with Cook’s.
“I left the room,” said _Hickson_, the lady’s maid, “when I had given
it her. Five or ten minutes afterwards I was alarmed by the ringing of
her bell. I went into her room and found her out of bed leaning upon a
chair in her night-dress. I thought she had fainted. She appeared to
suffer from what I thought were spasms. I ran and sent the coachman
for Dr. Taylor, and returned to her. Some of the other servants were
there assisting her. _She was lying on the floor. She screamed loudly,
and her teeth were clinched. She asked to have her arms and legs held
straight. I took hold of them; they were very much drawn up. She still
screamed and was in great agony. She requested that water should be
thrown over her, and I threw some. I put a bottle of hot water to her
feet, but it did not relax them. Shortly before she died she said she
felt easier. The last words she uttered were, ‘Turn me over.’ She died
very quietly. She was quite conscious, and knew me during the whole
time. About an hour and a quarter after I gave her the medicine she
died._”
_Cross-examined by Mr. Grove, Q.C._—“She could not sit up from the
time I went to her till she died. It was when she was in a paroxysm
that I tried to straighten her limbs. The effect of the cold water was
to throw her into a paroxysm. It was a continually recurring attack,
lasting about an hour and a quarter. Her teeth were clinched the whole
time.”
_Re-examined._—“She was stiff all the time till within a few minutes
of her death. She was conscious all the time.”
_Mr. Francis Taylor_, of Romsey, found her dead on his arrival. “Her
body was on the floor by the bed; _the hands very much bent; the feet
contracted and turned inwards; the soles of the feet hollowed up and
the toes contracted, apparently from recent spasmodic action; the inner
edge of each foot was turned; there was a remarkable rigidity about
the limbs; the body was warm, and the eyelids almost adherent to the
eyeballs._” Three days afterwards the witness made a _post-mortem_
examination, with the following results:—
“The contraction of the feet continued, but it had gone off somewhat
from the rest of the body. I found no disease in the body. _The heart
was contracted, and perfectly empty_, as were all the large arteries
leading from it. I analysed the medicine she had taken with another
medical man. It contained a large quantity of strychnia. It had
originally contained nine grains; she had taken a third—three grains.
I made a very casual examination of the stomach and bowels, as we had
plenty of proof that poison had been taken, without the use of tests.”
_Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee._—“In cases of death from
ordinary causes the body is much distorted. It does not generally
remain in the same position. If the body is not laid out immediately,
probably it is stiffened by the _rigor mortis_. The ankles were tied
by a bandage to keep them together. I commenced to open the body by
the thorax and abdomen. The head also was opened.”
The _third_ case was that of a Mr. Clutterbuck, a gentleman suffering
from paralysis, on whom, with _Dr. Chambers_, _Mr. E. D. Moore_, who
detailed the case, had attended some fifteen years before.
“We had been giving him,” said the witness, “small doses of strychnia,
when he went to Brighton. On his return he told us he had taken larger
doses of it, and we in consequence gave him a stronger dose. I made
up three draughts of a quarter of a grain each. He took one in my
presence. I remained with him a little time, and he said he felt quite
comfortable. About three quarters of an hour afterwards I was summoned
to him. _I found him stiffened in every limb, and the head drawn back.
He was desirous we should move him, and turn him and rub him._ We
tried to give him ammonia in a spoon, _and he snapped at it_. He was
suffering, I should say, more than three hours. Sedatives were given
to him. He survived the attack. _He was conscious all the time._”
_Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee._—“The spasms ceased in about
three hours, but the rigidity of the muscles remained till the next
day. His hands were at first drawn back, and he was much easier when
we got them round clinched together. His paralysis was better after
the attack.”
_Re-examined by the Attorney-General._—“Strychnia stimulates the
nerves which act upon the voluntary muscles, and therefore acts
beneficially in cases of paralysis.”
The _fourth_ case of poisoning by strychnia, though at this time given
anonymously, as it had not as yet been brought to a public trial, was
that of Mrs. Dove, of Leeds, more fully related in the next report. In
this case, _Mrs. Witham_, who had been in attendance on the deceased,
described how, after taking the medicine given to her, “_She complained
first of her back; her head was thrown back; her body stretched out;
that she twitched, her eyes were drawn aside, staring, and that when
the witness put her hands on the patient’s limbs they did not relax._”
In this case the illness commenced on the 25th of February; attacks
came on the 27th, 28th, and 29th (the last a very slight one), and then
again, about a quarter past eight, on the 1st of March, and the person
died about twenty minutes to eleven on that night. “She principally
complained of prickings in the legs, twitchings in the muscles and in
the hands, which she said she could compare to nothing else than a
galvanic shock. Between the attacks, she was composed. _She wished her
husband to rub her legs and arms._ She was dead when the doctor came.”
On _cross-examination_, the witness said that the sufferer “_could not
bear to have her legs touched when the spasms were strong upon her. Her
limbs were rigidly extended when she asked to be rubbed between the
intervals of the spasms. Touching her then brought on the spasms. Her
body was stiff immediately after death_,” but how long it continued so
the witness could not say, as she did not stay long. _She was sensible
from half an hour to an hour_, from a quarter past eight till after
nine, and the witness _supposed she was insensible the remainder of the
time; she did not speak_. On the Saturday before she died the symptoms
were the same as on the other days—not more violent.”
_Mr. Morley_, the surgeon who had attended this case, and whose opinion
as to the symptoms being identical with those in the present inquiry,
was directly opposed by _Mr. Nunneley_, of Leeds, who had then assisted
him in the _post-mortem_ examination, not only detailed the symptoms he
then saw, but also the method and results of his subsequent examination
of the body.
“I had attended,” said Mr. Morley, “on the lady to whom the last
witness has alluded for about two months before her death. On the
Monday before she died she was in her bed, apparently comfortable,
when I observed (as I stood by her side) _several slight convulsive
twitchings of her arms_. I supposed they arose from hysteria, and
ordered medicine in consequence. _The same symptoms appeared on the
following Wednesday and Thursday._ I saw her on Saturday, the day she
died. She was apparently better and quite composed in the middle of
the day. She complained of an attack she had had at night. She spoke
of pain and spasms in her back and neck, and of shocks. I and another
medical man were sent for hastily on Saturday night. We were met by
an announcement that the lady was dead. On the Monday I accompanied
another medical gentleman (Nunneley) to the _post-mortem_ examination.
We found no disease in any part of the body which would account for
death. There was no emaciation, wound, or sore. _There was a peculiar
expression of anxiety in the countenance. The hands were bent and
the fingers curved. The feet were strongly arched._ We carefully
examined the stomach and its contents for poison. We applied several
tests—nitric acid, followed by protochloride of tin,[41] sulphuric
acid, followed by bichromate of potash in a liquid and also in a solid
state. They are the best tests to detect strychnia. In each case we
found appearances characteristic of strychnia. We administered the
strychnia taken from the stomach to animals by inoculation—to two
mice, two rabbits, and a guinea-pig, having first separated it by
chemical analysis. We observed in each of the animals more or less
of the effects produced by strychnia, namely—_general uneasiness,
difficult breathing, convulsions of a tetanic kind, muscular rigidity,
arching backwards of the head and neck, violent stretching out of the
legs._ These symptoms appeared in some of the animals in four or five
minutes, in others in less than an hour. The guinea-pig suffered but
slightly at first, and was left, and was dead next day. The symptoms
were strongly marked in the rabbits. After death there was an interval
of flaccidity, after which rigidity commenced, more than if it had
been occasioned by the _rigor mortis_. I afterwards made numerous
experiments on animals with exactly similar results, the poison being
administered in a fluid form.”
_Cross-examined by Mr. Grove._—“I did not see the patient during a
severe attack. I have observed in animals that spasms are brought on
by touch. That is a very marked symptom. The spasm is like a galvanic
shock. The patient was not at all insensible during the time I saw
her, and she was able to swallow, but I did not see her during a
severe attack. After death we found the lungs very much congested.
There was a small quantity of bloody serum found in the pericardium.
The muscles of the whole body were dark and soft. There was a decided
quantity of effusion in the brain. There was also a quantity of serum
tinged with blood in the membranes of the spinal cord. The membranes
of the spinal marrow were congested to a considerable extent. We
opened the head first, and there was a good deal of blood flowing
out. _Part of the blood may have flowed from the heart. That might
partially empty the heart, and would make it uncertain whether the
heart was full or empty at the time of death. I have often examined
the hearts of animals poisoned by strychnia. The right side of the
heart is generally full._ In some cases I think that the symptoms
did not appear for an hour after the administration of the poison. I
have made the experiments in conjunction with Mr. Nunneley. We have
made experiments upon frogs, but they are different in many respects
from warm-blooded animals. I have in almost all cases found the
strychnia where it was known to have been administered. In one case
it was doubtful. We were sure the strychnia had been administered
in that case, but we doubted whether it had reached the stomach.
There were appearances which might lead one to infer the presence of
strychnia, but they were not satisfactory. I have detected strychnia
in the stomach nearly two months after death, when decomposition has
proceeded to a considerable extent.”
_Re-examined by the Attorney-General._—“From half a grain to a grain
has been administered to cats, rabbits, and dogs. From one to two
grains is quite sufficient to kill a dog.”
_Question._—“How does the strychnia act? Is it taken up by the
absorbents, and carried into the system?”
_Answer._—“I think it acts upon the nerves, but a part may be taken
into the blood and act through the blood. We generally examined
the stomach of the animals when the poison had been administered
internally. Sometimes we examined the skin. The poison found in the
stomach would be in excess of that absorbed into the system.”
_Question._—“Are you then of opinion that, a portion of the poison
being taken into the system and a portion being left in the stomach,
the portion taken into the system would produce tetanic symptoms and
death?”
_Mr. Serjeant Shee_ objected to a question which suggested a theory.
_The Attorney-General._—“What would be the operation of that portion
of the poison which is taken into the system?”
_Answer._—“It would destroy life.”
_Mr. Baron Alderson._—“And yet leave an excess in the stomach?”
_Answer._—“That is my opinion.”
_The Attorney-General._—“Would the excess remaining in the stomach
produce no effect?”
_Answer._—“I am not sure that strychnia could lie in the stomach
without acting prejudicially.”
_Question._—“Suppose that a minimum quantity is administered, which,
being absorbed into the system, destroys life, should you expect to
find any in the stomach?”
_Answer._—“I should expect sometimes to fail in discovering it.”
_Question._—“If death resulted from a series of minimum doses spread
over several days, would the appearance of the body be different from
that of one whose death had been caused by one dose?”
_Answer._—“I should connect the appearance of the body with the final
struggle of the last day.”
_Question._—“Would you expect a different set of phenomena in cases
where death had taken place after a brief struggle, and in cases where
the struggle had been protracted?”
_Answer._—“Certainly. At the _post-mortem_ examination of which I
have spoken we found fluid blood in the veins.”
_Mr. Serjeant Shee._—“Is it your theory that in the action of
poisoning the poison becomes absorbed and ceases to exist as poison?”
Answer.—“I have thought much upon that question, and have not formed
a decided opinion, but I am inclined to think that it is so. A part
may be absorbed and a part remain in the stomach unchanged.”
_Mr. Serjeant Shee._—“What chymical reason can you give for your
opinion that strychnia, after having effected the operation of
poisoning, ceases to be strychnia in the blood?”
_Answer._—“My opinion rests upon the general principle that, in
acting upon living bodies, organic substances—such as food and
medicine—are generally changed in their composition.”
_Mr. Serjeant Shee._—“What are the component parts of strychnia?”
_Mr. Baron Alderson._—“You will find that in any cyclopædia, brother
Shee.”
_Mr. Serjeant Shee._—“Have you any reason to believe that strychnia
can be decomposed by any sort of putrefying or fermenting process?”
_Witness._—“I doubt whether it can.”[42]
ANALYTICAL EVIDENCE.
On the fifth day, the late _Doctor Alfred Swaine Taylor_, the
well-known Analytical Chemist and Author of “Medical Jurisprudence”
(the text-book of the legal profession in all criminal investigations),
_Doctor Owen Rees_, now one of the physicians extraordinary to her
Majesty, and the late _Professor Brande_, of the Royal Institution,
were called as witnesses. By the two first, the analytical examination
of the various parts of Mr. Cook’s body had been conducted, and they
had made a joint report of the results. By the last, that report had
been carefully examined, and he had also heard all the evidence as to
symptoms previously given in the case. No inconsiderable portion of the
_cross-examination_ of Dr. Taylor was occupied by questions connected
with the publication, in the _Illustrated Times_, by Mr. Augustus
Mayhew, of what professed to be statements as to the details of their
analysis by Dr. Taylor and Dr. Rees, in which, if correctly reported,
the former had committed himself somewhat prematurely to opinions
on the case, and had used expressions towards the prisoner which,
to say the least, were not discreet. Dr. Taylor, however, stoutly
maintained that he had not used many of the expressions objected to;
that the opportunity of interviewing him, after the American fashion,
had been unfairly obtained, and the pretended report published not
only without, but contrary to, his expressed wish. Except, however,
as throwing a shade of partisanship over his conduct, and so far
lessening the value of his evidence, the whole episode was useless to
the defence—perhaps, to a certain extent, injurious. Dr. Taylor had
been hasty and injudicious, and undoubtedly taken at an advantage by
the energetic reporter, who certainly obtained his interview with him
by pretences not strictly true.[43] With these remarks, due to Dr.
Taylor’s reputation and abilities, we proceed to give his evidence.
_Dr. Alfred Swaine Taylor, examined by the Attorney-General._—“I
am a fellow of the College of Physicians, lecturer on medical
jurisprudence at Guy’s Hospital, and the author of the well-known
treatise on poisons and on medical jurisprudence. I have made the
poison called strychnia the subject of my attention. It is the
produce of the nux vomica, which also contains brucia, a poison
of an analogous character. Brucia is variously estimated at from
one-sixth to one-twelfth the strength of strychnia. Most varieties of
impure strychnia that are sold contain more or less brucia. Unless,
therefore, you are certain as to the purity of the article, you may be
misled as to its strength. I have performed a variety of experiments
with strychnia on animal life. I have never witnessed its action on
a human subject. I have tried its effects upon animal life—upon
rabbits—in ten or twelve instances. The symptoms are, on the whole,
very uniform. The quantity I have given has varied from half a grain
to two grains. Half a grain is sufficient to destroy a rabbit. I have
given it both in a solid and liquid state. When given in a fluid state
it produces its effects in a very few minutes; when in a solid state,
as a sort of pill or bolus, in about six to eleven minutes. The time
varies according to the strength of the dose, and also to the strength
of the animal.”
_Question._—“In what way does it operate, in your opinion?”
_Answer._—“It is first absorbed into the blood, then circulated
through the body, and especially acts on the spinal cord, from which
proceed the nerves acting on the voluntary muscles.”
_Question._—“Supposing the poison has been absorbed, what time would
you give for the circulating process?”
_Answer._—“The circulation of the blood through the whole system is
considered to take place about once in four minutes. The circulation
in animals is quicker. The absorption of the poison by rabbits is
therefore quicker. The time would also depend on the state of the
stomach,—whether it contained much food or not, whether the poison
came into immediate contact with the inner surface of the stomach.”
_Question._—“In your opinion, does the poison act immediately on the
nervous system, or must it first be absorbed?”
_Answer._—“It must first be absorbed.”
_Question._—“The symptoms, you say, are uniform. Will you describe
them?”
_Answer._—“The animal for about five or six minutes does not appear
to suffer, but moves about gently; when the poison begins to act it
suddenly falls on its side; there is a trembling, a quivering motion
of the whole of the muscles of the body, arising from the poison
producing violent and involuntary contraction. There is then a sudden
paroxysm or fit, the fore legs and the hind legs are stretched out,
the head and the tail are drawn back in the form of a bow, the jaws
are spasmodically closed, the eyes are prominent; after a short time
there is a slight remission of the symptoms, and the animal appears
to lie quiet, but the slightest noise or touch reproduces another
convulsive paroxysm; sometimes there is a scream, or a sort of shriek,
as if the animal suffered from pain; the heart beats violently
during the fit, and after a succession of these fits the animal dies
quietly. Sometimes, however, the animal dies during a spasm, and I
only know that death has occurred from holding my hand over the heart.
The appearances after death differ. In some instances the rigidity
continues. In one case the muscles were so strongly contracted for a
week afterwards, that it was possible to hold the body by its hind
legs stretched out horizontally. In an animal killed the other day
the body was flaccid at the time of death, but became rigid about
five minutes afterwards. I have opened the bodies of animals thus
destroyed.”
_Question._—“Could you detect any injury in the stomach?”
_Answer._—“No. I have found in some cases congestion of the membranes
of the spinal cord to a greater extent than would be accounted for
by the gravitation of the blood. In other cases I have found no
departure from the ordinary state of the spinal cord and the brain.
I ascribe congestion to the succession of fits before death. In a
majority of instances, three out of five, I found no change in the
abnormal condition of the spine. In all cases the heart has been
congested, especially the right side. I saw a case of ordinary tetanus
in the human subject years ago, but I have not had much experience of
such cases. I saw one case last Thursday week at St. Bartholomew’s
Hospital. The patient recovered.”
_Question._—“You have heard the description given by the witnesses of
the symptoms and appearances which accompanied Cook’s attacks?”
_Answer._—“I have.”
_Question._—“Were those symptoms and appearances the same as those
you have observed in the animals to which you administered strychnia?”
_Answer._—“They were. Death has taken place in the animals more
rapidly when the poison has been administered in a fluid than in a
solid form. They have died at various periods after the administration
of the poison. The experiments I have performed lately have been
entirely in reference to solid strychnia. In the first case the
symptoms began in seven minutes, and the animal died (including those
seven) in thirteen minutes. In the second case the symptoms appeared
in nine minutes, and the animal died in seventeen. In the third case
the symptoms appeared in ten minutes, and the animal died in eighteen.
In the fourth case the symptoms appeared in five minutes, and death
took place in twenty-two. In the fifth case the symptoms appeared in
twelve minutes, and death occurred in twenty-three. If the poison were
taken by the human subject in pills it would take a longer time to
act, because the structure of the pill must be broken up in order to
bring the poison in contact with the mucous membrane of the stomach. I
have administered it to rabbits in pills.”
_Question._—“Would poison given in pills take a longer period to
operate on a human subject than on a rabbit?”
_Answer._—“I do not think we can draw any inference from a comparison
of the rapidity of death in a human subject and in a rabbit. The
circulation and absorption are different in the two cases. There is
also a difference between one human subject and another. The strength
of the dose, too, would make a difference, as a large dose would
produce a more rapid effect than a small one. I have experimented
upon the intestines of animals, in order to reproduce the strychnia.
The process consists in putting the stomach and its contents in
alcohol, with a small quantity of acid which dissolves the strychnia,
and produces sulphate of strychnia in the stomach. The liquid is
then filtered, gently evaporated, and an alkali added—carbonate of
potash, which combines with the sulphuric acid, and precipitates the
strychnia. Tests are applied to the strychnia, or supposed strychnia,
when extracted. Strychnia has a peculiar strongly bitter taste. It is
not soluble in water, but it is in acids and in alcohol. The colour
tests are applied to the dry residue after evaporation. Change of
colour is produced by a mixture of sulphuric acid and bichromate of
potash. It produces a blue colour, changing to violet and purple,
and passing to red; but colouring tests are very fallacious, with
this exception,—when we have strychnia separated in its crystallised
state we can recognise the crystals by their form and their chemical
properties, and, above all, by the tetanic symptoms and death when
administered through a wound in the skin of animals.”[44]
_Question._—“Are there other vegetable substances from which, if
these colouring tests were applied, similar colours could be obtained?”
_Answer._—“There are a variety of mixtures which produce similar
colours;[45] one of them also has a bitter taste like strychnine.[46]
Vegetable poisons are more difficult of detection than mineral: the
tests are far more fallacious. I have endeavoured to discover the
presence of strychnine in animals I have poisoned in four cases,
assisted by Dr. Rees. I have applied the process I first described.
I have applied the tests of colouring and taste. In one case I
discovered some by the colour test. In a second case there was a
bitter taste, but no other indication of strychnine. In the other two
cases there were no indications at all. In the case where it had been
discovered by the colour test, two grains had been administered; and
in the second case, where there was a bitter taste, one grain. In one
of the cases where we failed to detect it, one grain, and, in the
other, half a grain had been given. I account for the absence of any
indication, _because it is absorbed in the blood, and is no longer
in the stomach. It is in a great part changed in the blood._ When
administered in large doses there is a retention of some in excess of
what is required for the destruction of life.”