1.--_Memorandum by Mr. Henderson._
We have now reached a point in this mysterious story at which I must
again direct your attention most particularly to the coincidences of
dates, &c., on which, indeed, depends entirely, as I have before said,
the only solution at which I have found it possible to arrive.
The length to which these depositions have run has obliged me to
divide them into distinct sections, each of which should bear more
directly upon some particular phase of the case. For this purpose I
have taken, as you will have perceived, first the early history of Mrs.
Anderton, and as we may, I think, fairly assume, of Madame R** also,
thus establishing, at the outset, the initiatory link of that chain of
connection between these two extraordinary cases, which, inexplicable
as either is in itself, will nevertheless, I cannot but imagine,
each help to elucidate the other. The second division placed us in
possession of the histories both of Mrs. Anderton and Madame R**, up
to the point at which the thread of their singular destinies crossed;
showing, also, how the Baron became aware of his wife's probable
relationship to Mrs. Anderton, and of the benefit thereby accruing to
her upon the death, without issue, of her sister and Mr. Anderton.
The third section deals with the first illness of Madame R**, to the
date and circumstances of which I felt it right to direct your most
particular attention.
In the fourth division of the evidence we then reviewed the
circumstances attending the fatal illness of Mrs. Anderton, which led
to her husband's arrest on suspicion of murder, and finally to his
suicide, while awaiting investigation. A considerable portion of the
evidence connected with this phase of the subject I have thought it
best to keep back for insertion in that division of the case which
bears more particularly upon the conduct and death of Mr. Anderton,
and which will follow that on which we are now about to enter. The
narrative, therefore, of Mrs. Anderton's last illness has been thus
far confined to the mention of it in the unfortunate lady's own diary,
with the note at its termination, in which her husband records the fact
of her decease. With this, however, I have coupled an account, drawn
partly from an earlier portion of the same diary, and partly from the
statement of the medical man by whom she was at the time attended, of
a previous illness very similar in general character to that by which
she was finally carried off, and apparently of an equally unaccountable
description. The object with which I have thus placed in juxtaposition
the first attacks respectively of Madame R** and Mrs. Anderton will
probably be sufficiently apparent. I have now to direct your attention
to a second illness of Madame R**, occurring, under what I cannot but
feel to be most suspicious circumstances, but a very few months before
her demise.
In proceeding with this portion of the case, the extreme importance
attaching to a thorough and correct appreciation of the dates of the
various occurrences will become more obvious at every step, and to them
I must again request your utmost attention. I had at first proposed
to submit to you in a tabular form the singular coincidences to which
I allude, but on reflection, such a course appeared objectionable,
as tending to place too strongly before you a view of the subject
with which I must confess myself thoroughly dissatisfied. I have,
therefore, preferred leaving entirely to yourselves the comparison of
the various dates, &c., limiting myself strictly to a verification of
their accuracy. In many instances this has been no easy task, and more
particularly in establishing satisfactorily the exact date (5th April,
1856), at which the symptoms of Madame R**'s second illness first
appeared, wherein I have experienced a difficulty only compensated by
the importance of the result.
I have, therefore, to request that the depositions here following may
be carefully compared with the concluding portion of Mrs. Anderton's
diary, and also with the statement of Dr. Dodsworth. In making this
comparison you will notice, besides the points I have already referred
to respecting dates, various discrepancies between facts as actually
occurring and as represented to Mr. and Mrs. Anderton by the Baron.
These I need not here particularise, as they will be sufficiently
obvious on a perusal of the depositions themselves, but it is as well
to draw your attention generally to them, as they seem to have a
significant bearing upon other parts of the case.
I must request you also to bear in mind the relation in which the Baron
and his wife were supposed to stand towards each other previously to
their marriage, and will now proceed to lay before you the depositions
relating, as I have said, to the second illness of the latter.
2.--_Statement of Mrs. Brown._
My name is Jane Brown. I am a widow, and my poor dear husband was
a clerk in the city. I don't know in whose house. I did know but I
forget. My memory is very bad. I live in Russell Place. The house is
my own, not hired. My poor dear husband left it to me in his will. I
sometimes let it off in lodgings. Not always. Only when I can get quiet
lodgers. Last year[1] I let the first and second floors to Baron R**.
The ground floor was let to Dr. Marsden. He has had it several years.
He does not live there. He has a practice near London. He comes to
Russell Place every Monday and Friday to see his patients. He used to
live with us. That was in my poor dear husband's lifetime. Baron R**
took the rest of the house except the attics. I lived there myself. I
cannot remember when the Baron came. It was some time in February or
March. I am sure I cannot remember. I have no means of ascertaining. I
don't keep any accounts. My poor dear husband always kept the accounts.
I have kept none since he died. I dare say I lose money by it, but
I can't help it. I have no head for it. I am pretty sure it was in
February or March. I think about the beginning of March.[2] There was
no other lodger then. Not till my son went away from home again. He
was away from home then. He came home some time in March or April. I
suppose it was in March. He came from Melbourne to Liverpool. He was
at home for some weeks. I can't tell how many. He went away again in
April, or it might have been May. I am almost sure it was not later
than May. Not so late I think. Mrs. Troubridge could tell you. Richard
married her daughter. Richard is my son. He married Ellen Troubridge.
That was while he was at home last year. They had been engaged ever so
long. He came home on purpose to marry her. He had got a promise of
something at Melbourne, and was obliged to go back directly. He worked
his passage home from Melbourne. I do not know what ship he came in. I
don't think he shipped in his own name. I forget why it was. Something
about not liking to have it known. I don't know why not. I don't know
at all what name he took. I cannot remember when he came home or when
he went. I do not know when he left Melbourne. He brought home one
paper. There is only a small piece of it left. He was with me all the
time he was at home except Saturdays and Sundays. He used to go down to
Brighton then to see Ellen. She was in a shop there. He used to go by
the excursion train and stay with her mother from Saturday to Monday.
All the rest of the time he was with me. That is all I can tell you
about him. The other lodger was a friend of his. He had known him in
Australia. He asked him to his wedding. That was at our house. It was
on a Monday, and he came the Saturday before. They all came up together
from Brighton. The Baron let us use his rooms. He went away somewhere
to give his lady change of air. I think it was because she had been
ill. I cannot be sure. She was ill several times at my house. She died
there. I forget when was the first time she was ill there. It was while
my son was in England. I remember talking to him about it. He was away
from home at the time. There was no one in the house but myself. I
remember it because I was so frightened. There was nobody at all. Not
even a servant. I generally have a servant. I was without one then for
two or three months. I got a charwoman to come in the day. The reason
was my servant got tipsy. She had to be taken away by the police and
I was afraid for a long while to get another. I can't at all remember
when that was. I think it must have been before the Baron came. I can't
be sure. I am quite sure it was before Madame R** was taken ill. I am
sure of that because I remember so well how frightened I was. I think
Dr. Marsden attended Madame R**. He used to be very friendly with the
Baron. Everybody liked him. He was so good-natured and so very kind to
his wife. We did not think so much of her. She was very quiet, but she
did not seem to care about him. She seemed frightened like. I sometimes
thought she was not quite right in her head. The Baron was always kind
to her. He was good-natured with everybody. I never heard him say a
hard word of any one but once. That was of young Aldridge. He was
Richard's friend who lodged with us.[3] He made a noise and disturbed
Madame R**. He came home one night quite intoxicated, and the Baron
asked me to give him notice. He said if Mr. Aldridge did not go he
must. Of course I gave him notice directly. He said it was all spite.
Of course I knew that was not true. He said he was not drunk, but the
policeman found him lying on the doorstep. I forget what he said. It
was some foolish story about the Baron. I do not know of any reason why
they should have quarrelled. I remember he said something once about
Madame R** walking in her sleep. I don't know what it was. I don't
think that could have had anything to do with it. Of course it could
not. The Baron complained of being disturbed. That was all. I do not
remember that I was ever disturbed myself. His room was next to mine. I
might have been disturbed without remembering it. I certainly was that
night he came home intoxicated. He might have disturbed Madame R** and
I slept through it. I sleep heavy sometimes. I forget when this was and
when he left the house. I cannot remember the exact dates of anything.
My poor dear husband always did everything of that sort for me. He was
a very exact man. I have no sort of books or papers of any kind to
which I could refer. This is all I can tell you about it.
3.--_Statement of Mrs. Troubridge._
My name is Ellen Troubridge. My husband is a seafaring man. He is
captain of a small collier. We live at Shoreham, near Brighton. I have
one daughter, whose name is Ellen. She is married to a man of the name
of Richard Brown. He is in Australia. He went out to Australia in
1856. I forget the exact date. It was some time in April or May. The
ship's name was the Maria Somes. She sailed from Gravesend. My daughter
was married on the 14th of April. That was not very long before they
sailed. She had been engaged to young Brown for three or four years.
He came home on purpose to marry her. I don't remember exactly when he
came home. It must have been about a month before. Something of that
kind. He was in a great hurry to get out again. He wanted to marry by
license, so as to be quicker, but I told him it was a foolish expense.
He had the banns put up the first Sunday he was at home. I think it was
the first, but cannot be quite sure. My daughter was then in service.
She was at a shop in Brighton. During the week she used to sleep at
a friend's house, and on Saturdays she used to come home to us for
Sundays. Brown used always to come down on Saturdays. He used to come
by the cheap excursion train. He used to go to Brighton and call for
Nelly, and walk with her to Shoreham. He used to walk back with her
early Monday morning, and go on to town. He never came at other times.
It was no good. Nelly was only at home Sundays. He wanted her to leave
and go to his mother's. She would not leave the shop till her time was
out. I would not let him be at Brighton. I was afraid people might
talk. So far as I know, he was at home all the rest of the time. The
marriage took place from Mrs. Brown's house. She had a lodger then--a
foreigner, I think. He went out of town for two or three days, and lent
her his rooms. After the wedding young Brown and my daughter went to
Southend for a few days. I cannot say exactly how long. About a week or
a fortnight. On the Saturday before they sailed we all went down to
Gravesend to meet them and see them off. The ship was to have sailed
on the Sunday. We all went to Rosherville, and slept at Gravesend that
night. I had some friends there who gave us beds. Mrs. Brown went back
on Sunday, but I stayed. A young man by the name of Aldridge was with
us. He was a friend of Brown's. I did not much like him. He went back
with Mrs. Brown. I think he took lodgings in her house. I cannot call
to mind the exact day young Brown came home. I think it must have been
some time in March.
4.--_Statement of Dr. Marsden_
My name is Anthony Marsden. I am a physician, and formerly resided at
Mrs. Brown's house, in Russell Place. Some three or four years ago I
found the atmosphere of London beginning to tell upon my health, and
determined to remove into the suburbs. I bought a small practice in
the neighbourhood of St. John's Wood, and gave up the greater portion
of my London patients. I was, however, desirous of not altogether
relinquishing that connection, and with this object rented two rooms
at Mrs. Brown's, where I might be consulted by such patients as I
still retained in that neighbourhood. I used to drive up for this
purpose every Monday and Thursday morning. I had been doing this for
some time, when the first and second floor apartments were taken by
the Baron R**. I did not at first much like him. I thought him an
impostor. He seemed, however, to wish to make my acquaintance, and I
found that he was, at all events, a very highly informed man on all
matters of science. We had frequent conversations respecting mesmerism.
He certainly seemed to be himself a believer in it. Were I not myself
thoroughly satisfied of its impossibility, I am not at all sure but
that he might have convinced me on the subject. I am quite unable to
account for many of the phenomena exhibited. They were, however, of
course, to be accounted for in some way. He seemed a very excellent
chemist, and we used at times to pursue our investigations together.
There was a small room at the back of the house, on the basement floor,
which he used as a laboratory. He invited me to make use of it, and
I was frequently there. He was always engaged in experiments of one
kind or another, and had various ingenious projects in hand. In the
laboratory was a large assortment of chemicals and medicines of various
kinds. In the case of poor patients, I have sometimes asked him to
make up a prescription, and he has done so. At the time at which I
knew him, he was engaged in a series of experiments on the metals, and
more especially on mercury, antimony, lead, and zinc. I think he must
have had almost every preparation of these that is made. I believe
that his researches were for the purpose of finding a specific against
the disease so prevalent among painters, which is known by the name of
"lead colic." The laboratory was at the back of the house, and quite
detached from all the other rooms. There was an open space between
it and the rest of the house, with only a passage communicating with
the offices. This passage was shut off by a glass door, and there was
a wooden door at the end into the laboratory. Both these doors were
always kept closed. They were not usually locked. I told the Baron I
thought they should be, but he said no one would go there. He had a
weight put on to the laboratory door to close it. The glass door had
a spring already. I frequently made use of his laboratory: sometimes
when he was absent. I might go there with or without him, whenever I
pleased. There was no attempt at concealing from me anything whatever
that was done there. It was all quite open. I attended Madame R**
through greater part of her illness. It was a very long affair, and of
a very singular character. I cannot be at all certain as to the date
at which it commenced. I was not regularly called in at the time, and
did not notice it in my book. The Baron only consulted me in a friendly
way about it, two or three days afterwards. It was certainly as much
as that. I think it was the third day. I cannot be sure of that, but I
am quite sure it was at least the second. By being the second day, I
mean that at least one clear day had intervened between the night on
which she was ill and the day on which I was consulted by the Baron.
I cannot swear to more than one, but I think it must have been. From
what the Baron told me of the symptoms, I remember concluding it to be
a case of English cholera, but she was almost recovered at the time I
first heard of it, and I did not prescribe for her. About a fortnight
or three weeks after this she had another slight attack, for which
the Baron himself also prescribed. He acquainted me on my visit to
town with the course he had pursued, and I entirely concurred in his
treatment of the case. The attack, however, returned, I think more
than once, and he then asked me to see and prescribe for her. I first
saw her professionally on the 23rd of May, 1856.[4] This was two days
after the third or fourth attack, which occurred on the night of the
21st of May. As soon as I regularly took up her case, I made notes of
it in my diary. Extracts from this are inclosed (_vide_ 5 _herewith_),
showing the progress of the case from time to time. I attended her
throughout her illness. The attacks occurred, as will be seen from my
diary, about every fortnight. They increased in intensity up to the
10th of October, 1856. At this time she was apparently, for three or
four days, almost _in articulo mortis_, and I was unable to hold out
any hope of her recovery. Another attack would certainly have been
fatal. Happily the disease appeared to have spent itself, and at the
expiration of the fortnight no renewal of the more acute symptoms
was experienced. From this date Madame R** progressed steadily but
slowly to convalescence, and would no doubt have ultimately entirely
recovered, but for the unfortunate accident which put an end to her
life. Madame R**'s case was one of great difficulty. It was apparently
one of chronic gastritis; but its recurrence in an acute form at stated
intervals was a very abnormal incident. The case presented, in fact,
all the more prominent features of that of chronic antimonial poisoning
recorded by Dr. Mayerhofer in Heller's Archiv., 1846, and alluded to
by Professor Taylor in his work on Poisons, p. 539. There were also
strong points of general resemblance to the other cases of McMullen
and Hardman, quoted by Professor Taylor at the same page, and recorded
in Guy's Hospital Reports for October, 1857. As matters progressed,
I took the opportunity of pointing this out as delicately as I could
to the Baron, and asked if he had any suspicions of foul play. He
seemed at first almost amused by the suggestion; but upon further
consultation was inclined to take a graver view of the matter. We went
carefully through the cases in question, the Baron translating that of
Dr. Mayerhofer for my benefit, as I was not a German scholar. At his
suggestion, we determined to analyse the various excretions, &c., and
an examination was accordingly instituted in the Baron's laboratory.
He was always very particular in keeping up the supply of medicine,
and would never allow the bottles, &c., to be thrown away. There was
therefore some remnant of every medicine that had been made up for
her. These we tested carefully, as well as the excreta, &c., both for
arsenic and for antimony, but without finding the slightest trace of
either. The analysis was conducted by the Baron, who took the greatest
interest in it. I could not, perhaps, have done it myself. Such matters
have not come within my line of practice. In such a case I should
certainly not trust to my own manipulations. I trusted to those of the
Baron, because I knew him to be an expert practical chemist, and in
the daily habit of such operations. My own share in them was limited
to the observation of results, and their comparison with those pointed
out by Professor Taylor. I did not take any special pains to ascertain
the purity of the chemical tests employed or of their being in fact
what they were assumed to be. That is to say, when a colourless liquid
with all the apparent characteristics of nitric acid was taken from
a bottle labelled "Nit. Ac." I took for granted that nitric acid was
being employed. Similarly, of course, with the other chemical agents.
It never occurred to me to do otherwise. Nor did I take any especial
precautions to identify the matters examined. Others might certainly
have been substituted; but if so, it must have been done by the Baron
himself. It was, perhaps, possible that he might have conducted his
investigations, under such supervision as I then exercised, with
fictitious tests, and it was quite so to substitute other matters and
mislead me by subjecting them to a real analysis. That is to say, this
would have been possible to be done by the Baron. No one else could,
under the circumstances, have done it, or at least without his direct
connivance. I had no ground for any suspicion of the kind, nor do I
see any now. I think it most unwarrantable. Every circumstance that
came under my notice goes equally to contravene such a supposition. The
Baron was devotedly attached to his wife: he supplied her liberally
with professional advice, as also with nurses, medicine, and every
necessary; his care for her led him to precautions which, in their
incidental results, must have inevitably exposed any attempt at the
administration of poison. During the severer period of the disorder,
he had no opportunity of attempting such a crime, as he universally
insisted on both food and medicine being both prepared and administered
by the nurses; he himself rendered every assistance in the endeavour
to detect any such attempt when its possibility had been suggested by
myself; and lastly, Madame R** did not die, although the investigation
had already removed all suspicion. I think such an imputation wholly
unwarranted and unwarrantable from any one circumstance of the case.
5.--_Extracts from Dr. Marsden's Diary_[5]
MAY 23rd.--Madame R**, nausea, vomiting, tendency to diarrhoea, profuse
perspiration, and general debility. Pulse low, 100. Spirits depressed.
Burning pain in stomach--abdomen tender on pressure. Tongue discoloured.
26th.--Madame R** slightly better--less nausea and pain.
30th.--Madame R**. Improvement continues.
JUNE 2nd.--Madame R** improving.
6th.--Ditto.
9th.--Recurrence of symptoms on Saturday evening.[6] Increased nausea,
vomited matter yellow with bile. Pulse low, 105. Throat sore, and
slight constriction. Tongue foul.
13th.--Symptoms slightly ameliorated. Treatment continued.
16th.--Ditto. Tongue slightly clearer. Pulse 100.
20th.--Improvement continued. Pulse slightly firmer.
23rd.--Ditto.
24th.--Special visit. Return of symptoms last night. Great increase
of nausea and vomiting--very yellow with bile. Throat sore and tongue
foul. Abdomen very tender on pressure. Slight diarrhoea. Tingling
sensation in limbs.
27th.--Slight improvement.
30th.--Continued, but slight. Pulse firmer.
JULY 3rd.--Improvement continued, especially in throat. Perspiration
still distressing. Less tingling in limbs.
6th.--Improvement continued. Pulse somewhat firmer, 110.
(10th to 20th.--Absent in Gloucestershire.)
20th.--A slight rally. Baron says attack shortly after last visit, but
recovery for time more rapid.
24th.--Improvement continues, but less rapid. Pulse 110.
27th.--Recurrence yesterday. Vomiting, purging amounting to diarrhoea.
Soreness and aphthous state of mouth and throat. Perspiration. Pain in
abdomen. Complains of taste in mouth like lead. Pulse low, 115. Qy.
antimony? Speak, Baron.
31st.--Analysis--satisfactory. Symptoms slightly abated.
AUGUST 3rd.--Improvement continued. Pulse 112, firmer.
7th.--Same.
10th.--Return of vomiting and purging. General aggravation of symptoms.
Much prostrated.
24th, 28th, 31st.--Slight improvement.
SEPTEMBER 4th.--Improvement continued, but slight.
7th.--Return of severe symptoms. Vomiting, extremely yellow, much
bile. Diarrhoea. Pulse low and fluttering, 120. Violent perspiration.
Slight wandering. Extreme soreness and constriction of throat. Slight
convulsive twitchings in limbs. Great exhaustion and prostration.
10th, 14th, 18th.--Very slight abatement of symptoms.
21st.--Violence of symptoms increased. Pulse 125. Great prostration.
25th, 28th.--Very slight amelioration. Pulse 125. Wandering.
OCTOBER 1st, 4th, 8th.--Symptoms slightly less severe.
11th.--Aggravation of all symptoms. Pulse 132, low and fluttering. Face
flushed and pale. Much convulsive twitching in limbs. Power of speech
quite gone. Entire prostration. Can hardly live through night.
12th, 13th, 14th.--Special visits. No perceptible change.
15th.--Pulse a shade firmer, 136.
N.B.--From this date recovery slow but steady.
6.--_Memorandum by Mr. Henderson._
From the very vague nature of the foregoing evidence, so far as dates
are concerned, it was, as you will at once perceive, no very easy task
to determine the precise day of Madame R**'s first attack. To the view
of the case, however, which I was even then inclined to adopt this was
a matter of the last importance, and I determined to spare no effort
to elucidate it if possible from the very loose data furnished by the
depositions. In this I have, I think, been successful; but, as the
process has been somewhat complicated, I must ask you to follow me
through it step by step.
The difficulty of tracing the truth seemed at first sight not a little
augmented by the fact that no one had been in the house but Mrs. Brown
herself, whose memory, even had it afforded any clue, could not have
been relied on. On further consideration, however, I began to fancy
myself mistaken in this respect, and finally conceived a hope that this
very fact might, if properly handled, prove an assistance instead of an
obstacle to my investigation. The following was the course of reasoning
I pursued.
There are only two points on which Mrs. Brown appears to be certain;
her son's presence in England, and her being herself alone in the
house on the actual day in question. The only chances of success
therefore seemed to be:--First, in ascertaining precisely the limit
of time within which such a combination was possible; and, second, in
determining by a process of elimination the actual day or days on which
such a combination could fall.
The result has been far more complete than at the outset of the
investigation I could venture to hope.
1st. For the period of time to which our researches should be directed.
This was obviously limited by the residence of Richard Brown in
England, and my first efforts were therefore directed towards
determining the exact dates of his arrival and departure.
1. On inquiry at Liverpool, I found that the only vessels which had
arrived from Melbourne during the month of March, 1856, were as follows:
Ship. Captain. Owners. Arrived.
James Baines McDonald Jas. Baines & Co 4th March
Lightning Enright " 24th "
Emma Underwood Pilkington Bros 27th "
Of these the James Baines left Melbourne on the 28th November, and the
Lightning on the 28th December. The exact date of sailing of the Emma I
have not been able to ascertain, but it is immaterial to the case.
The fragment of newspaper preserved by Mrs. Brown has no date, nor
could I at first find any clue by which it might be determined. The
last paragraph, however, commences as follows:
SEASONABLE WEATHER!--The thermometer has, for the last four days, never
been lower than eighty degrees in the shade. We wonder what our friends
in England would say to singing their Ch... rols in such a....
The remainder is torn off, but the missing syllables are clearly
Ch_ristmas Ca_rols, and this shows clearly that the paper must have
been published after the departure of the James Baines on the 28th
November. Richard Brown must therefore have come home either in the
Lightning or the Emma, the earliest of which reached Liverpool on the
evening of the 24th March. The 25th of March therefore is the earliest
date from which our examination need commence.
2. From Mrs. Troubridge, mother of the young woman to whom Richard
Brown was married during his stay in England, I learned that the young
couple sailed for Sydney in the Maria Somes. Mrs. Brown was unable to
give me the date of this vessel's departure, but a search through the
file of the Times for April, 1856, shows that she left Gravesend on the
23rd of that month. The period to be analysed is therefore confined to
the interval between the 25th March and the 25th April, 1856.
3. During this period, as we learn from Mrs. Brown's statement, Richard
Brown was at home every day except Saturdays and Sundays. These were
respectively, 29th and 30th of March, and 5th, 6th, 12th, 13th, 19th,
and 20th of April.
4. Dr. Marsden, in his evidence, states most distinctly that he did not
see Madame R** until at least "one clear day" had elapsed after her
attack. Dr. Marsden's visits take place on the Monday and Friday of
each week. Madame R**'s seizure therefore did not occur on a Sunday.
This reduces the days on which it may have happened to the 29th March
and 5th, 12th, and 19th April.
5. From Mrs. Troubridge's evidence we learn that Mrs. Brown and the
whole party slept at Gravesend on the Saturday night previous to the
sailing of the Maria Somes. Mrs. Brown was therefore absent from town
on the 19th April. The issue is thus narrowed to the 29th March and the
5th and 12th April.
6. From Mrs. Brown's statement we learn that on the Saturday and Sunday
preceding the wedding her son's friend Aldridge slept at the house. The
wedding took place on the 14th April. On the 12th April, therefore,
Mrs. Brown was not alone. The only days, therefore, on which the
occurrence, as described, could have taken place are the 29th March and
5th April.
At this point I feared for some time that my clue was at an end.
This would, however, have been most unsatisfactory, as the possible
error of a week in point of date would have seriously detracted from
the trustworthiness of the entire case. The only possible chance of
determining the point seemed to lie in ascertaining the precise date
of the servant's dismissal, and it at length occurred to me that this
might be accomplished by means of the police records of the court
before which she was carried. From them I found--
7. That the offence for which she was discharged was committed on
Sunday, the 30th of April. On the 29th, therefore, she was still in
Mrs. Brown's house. The only day, therefore, on which Madame R**'s
first seizure could have taken place as stated during Richard Brown's
stay in England, and on a night when Mrs. Brown was alone in the house,
was the 5th of April.
The importance of this date, thus fixed, you will, I think, at once
perceive.
[Footnote 1: 1856, R. H.]
[Footnote 2: Clearly so. The Baron was in Dublin on 25th Feb.--R. H.]
[Footnote 3: This portion of Mrs. Brown's evidence affects more
particularly the part of the case to be hereafter referred to in Part
vii.; but I have thought it best to preserve it intact.--R. H.]
[Footnote 4: Comp. journal of Mrs. Anderton, 25th May and 10th June.
_Vide_ Section III. 3.]
[Footnote 5: These extracts will, of course, be chiefly interesting to
the medical profession, and may be passed over by the general reader.
Some details are necessarily excluded. The notes, also, relating to the
treatment adopted by Dr. Marsden, not materially affecting the question
at issue, which is concerned only with the symptoms of disorder,
are omitted as irrelevant, and therefore confusing. _Vide_ note to
statement of Dr. Watson, Section III., 2.]
[Footnote 6: 7th June.--R. H.]