Cook, John Parsons, -1855; Palmer, William, 1824-1856 -- Trials, litigation, etc.; Trials (Murder) -- England -- London
(His lordship read the letter
written by Dr. Taylor to Mr. Gardener.) You will bear in mind,
gentlemen, that was written before the symptoms were known to Dr. Taylor
and Dr. Rees, but they had been informed that prussic acid and strychnia
and opium had been bought by Palmer on the Tuesday. They search for all
these poisons and they find none; but they swear distinctly that they
found antimony in the body, and therefore, in the absence of the
symptoms, they do not impute the death to strychnia, but they say it may
possibly have been produced by antimony, because the quantity they
discovered in the body was no test of the quantity that had been
administered to the deceased. Then a letter was read which Dr. Taylor
wrote to the _Lancet_, and I must say that he would have done better to
have abstained from taking any notice whatsoever of what was said about
him, but you will say whether what he did write materially detracts from
the credit which would otherwise be due to him. I think the passage in
this letter in the _Lancet_, which was relied on, is the last passage
which I will read to you. He explains what his evidence had been, and
complains of the reports that had been spread abroad respecting him, and
then he concludes his letter thus--“In concluding this letter I would
observe that during a quarter of a century which I have now specially
devoted to toxicological inquiries, I have never met with any cases like
those suspected of poisoning at Rugeley. The mode in which they will
affect the person accused is of minor importance compared with their
probable influence on society. I have no hesitation in saying that the
future security of life in this country will mainly depend on the judge,
the jury, and the counsel who may have to dispose of the charges of
murder which have arisen out of these investigations.” I again say that
I think it would have been better if he had trusted to the credit which
he had already acquired, instead of writing a letter to the _Lancet_;
but it is for you to say that he, having been, as he says,
misrepresented, and writing this letter to set himself right, whether
that materially detracts from the credit which is due to him.
Then Dr. Rees follows, and he corroborates the evidence given by Dr.
Taylor. Here, therefore, is Dr. Rees, whom no one can suppose to have an
interest in the matter. I do not know what interest it can be supposed
that Dr. Taylor had in the matter, for he was regularly employed in his
profession; he knew nothing about Mr. Palmer until he was called on by
Mr. Stevens to analyse the contents of the jar; he had no animosity
against him, and no interest whatever in misrepresenting the matter.
Mr. SERJEANT SHEE--He said that the experiments with the two rabbits
were made after the inquest.
[Sidenote: Lord Campbell]
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