Cook, John Parsons, -1855; Palmer, William, 1824-1856 -- Trials, litigation, etc.; Trials (Murder) -- England -- London
Gentlemen, I venture, upon the evidence, to assert boldly that the cases
of idiopathic tetanus and traumatic, or what I may call natural tetanus,
are marked by clear and distinct characteristics, distinguishing them
from the tetanus produced by strychnia; and I say that the tetanus which
accompanied Mr. Cook’s death is not referable to either of those forms
of tetanus. You have upon that point the evidence of witnesses of the
highest competency and of the most unquestionable integrity; and upon
their evidence I am quite satisfied you can come to no other conclusion
but that this was not a case either of idiopathic or of traumatic
tetanus. But, then, they say it may have been something else; and
various attempts have been made to set up different causes as capable of
producing this tetanic disease. And, first, we have the theory of
general convulsions; and Mr. Nunneley, having gone through the bead-roll
of the supposed infirmities of Mr. Cook, says, “Oh, this may have been a
case of general convulsions. I have known general convulsions to assume
a tetanic character.” “Well, but pause a moment, Mr. Nunneley, have you
ever seen one single case in which death arising from general
convulsions, accompanied with tetanic symptoms, has not ended in the
unconsciousness of the patient before death!--No, I never knew such a
case--not one. But in some book or other, I am told that there is some
such case reported”; and he cites, not for that purpose, I think, but he
cites, with reference to general convulsions being sometimes accompanied
with tetanic symptoms, and ending in death, a very eminent author of the
present day. I mean Dr. Copland. Dr. Copland is living, and Dr. Copland
might have been called. The author of the book, I apprehend, would stand
before you as a higher authority than a man who merely quotes the book
as the foundation of his knowledge. Dr. Copland might have been called.
Dr. Copland was not called, notwithstanding the challenge which I threw
out. Why? Because it is infinitely better in such a case to call
together from the east and from the west practitioners of more or less
obscurity, instead of bringing to bear upon the subject the light of
science which is treasured up in the breasts of the eminent
practitioners with whom this great city abounds. Dr. Copland is not
called; but I say, as regards general convulsions, the distinction is
plain, that where they destroy the patient they destroy consciousness;
and here it is unquestionably the fact, that to the last moment of Mr.
Cook’s existence, until his burst heart ceased to beat, his
consciousness remained.
[Sidenote: Attorney-General]
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