Treatise on Poisons: In relation to medical jurisprudence, physiology, and the practice of physicChristison, Robert, Sir
Science
Treatise on Poisons: In relation to medical jurisprudence, physiology, and the practice of physic
Christison, Robert, Sir
Medical jurisprudence; Toxicology
The correspondence in point of time between the appearance of symptoms
of poisoning, and the administration of suspicious articles by an
individual, constitutes still more decisive proof in a set of cases, in
which it is of great value, as the chemical evidence is generally
defective,—namely, where poisoning is attempted with repeated moderate
doses. If the several renewals or exacerbations of illness correspond
with the periods when suspicious articles have been given by the same
individual, the circumstantial evidence of the administration may be
even tantamount to direct proof. Thus, on the trial of Miss Blandy for
the murder of her father, it was proved, that Mr. Blandy on several
occasions, after the prisoner received certain suspicious powders from
her lover, was taken ill with vomiting and purging; and that on two
occasions recently before his death, when he got from his daughter a
bowl of gruel which contained a gritty sediment, he was attacked after a
very short interval with pricking and heat in the throat, mouth,
stomach, and bowels,—with sickness, vomiting, gripes, and bloody
diarrhœa.[127] Here the proof of administration by the prisoner was
complete.
These examples will show how the evidence of a particular person’s
criminality may be affected by the relation subsisting in point of time
between the commencement of the symptoms and the suspicious
administration of particular articles. But farther, the special period
at which the symptoms begin may even at times supply strong evidence of
his instrumentality, although there may be no direct proof from general
evidence of his having been concerned in administering anything whatever
in a suspicious manner. This statement is well exemplified by the case
of Mrs. Humphreys, who was convicted at the Aberdeen Autumn Circuit in
1830 for poisoning her husband, by pouring sulphuric acid down his
throat while he was asleep. It was clearly proved, as will be seen under
the head of sulphuric acid, that the deceased died of this poison; and
the administration was brought home to the prisoner in the following
singular manner. The only inmates of the house were the deceased, the
prisoner, and a maid-servant. The deceased got a little intoxicated one
evening at a drinking party in his own house; and after his friends all
left the house, and the street-door was barred inside, he went to bed in
perfect health, and soon fell fast asleep. But he had slept scarcely
twenty minutes, when he suddenly awoke with violent burning in his
throat and stomach; and he expired in great agony towards the close of
the second day. Now sulphuric acid, when it occasions the violent
symptoms observed in this instance, invariably excites them in a few
seconds, or in the very act of swallowing. It was, therefore, impossible
that the man could have received the poison at the time he was drinking
with his friends; and as he knew he had not taken any thing else
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account