Dr. Humphreys gave it as his opinion that the appearances at the post-mortem were _consistent with congestion_ of the stomach not _necessarily caused by an irritant poison_, and that the symptoms during life were also consistent with congestion not caused by an irritant poison, but with acute inflammation of the stomach and intestines, produced by any cause whatever, and which would produce similar pathological results. He thought death was caused by some irritant poison, most likely arsenic, but he _would not like to swear that it was_. Dr. Humphreys’ evidence, therefore, amounted to this, that the deceased died from gastro-enteritis, a natural disease, attributable to a variety of causes, and that, apart from the suggestions already referred to, he would have certified accordingly. Dr. Humphreys’ evidence was confirmed by that of Dr. Carter, who stated he came to the same conclusion as Dr. Humphreys, “but in a more positive manner.” Dr. Carter had assisted at the post-mortem examination, besides being in close attendance on the deceased for the five days preceding his death, which he attributed to taking some irritant wine or decomposed meat, or to some grave error of diet; and when pressed as to whether he had any reason to suppose the article taken was poison, he explained that he did, but that by poison he meant something that was bad--it might be tinned meat, which the deceased had partaken of at the race dinner, or wine, or something which had set up gastritis. This witness’s account of the post-mortem was that they _found no arsenic_, but merely evidence of an irritant poison in the stomach and intestines, probably arsenic. Dr. Carter’s evidence was therefore _against poisoning by arsenic_ being conclusively accepted as the cause of death, _although subsequently he said he had no doubt it was arsenic_. Dr. Barron’s evidence as to the cause of death was that he considered from the post-mortem appearances that death was due to inflammation of the stomach and bowels, due to some irritant poison, but that he was unable to point to the particular poison, apart from what he heard; and, pressed as to what he meant by poison, the witness stated that poison might be bad tinned meat, bad fish, mussels, or generally bad food of any kind, or alcohol taken in excess. THE CHIEF WITNESS FOR THE PROSECUTION Dr. Stevenson expressed his opinion that the deceased died from arsenic poisoning, giving as his reasons that the main symptoms were those attributable to an irritant poison, and that they more closely resembled those of arsenic than of any other irritant of which he knew. He stated that he had known a great number of cases of poisoning by arsenic in every shape, and that he acted officially for the Home Office and Treasury in such cases. Dr. Stevenson was the witness of the prosecution, and gave his evidence _before_ he had heard the evidence for the defense.