Cook, John Parsons, -1855; Palmer, William, 1824-1856 -- Trials, litigation, etc.; Trials (Murder) -- England -- London
Gentlemen, I am not about to discuss that part of the case in detail,
but I call your attention to it for the purpose of claiming for it its
proper place in this discussion, and that you may know at the
commencement of my address what the whole course of my argument will be,
and not be under the impression that, because I do not under the three
heads to which I have directed your attention advert particularly to
that head. I intend to pass it over. I tell you exactly what the case
for the defence will be, as to the point that strychnia was not found in
Mr. Cook’s body. Let me state it as fairly as I can--the gentlemen who
have come to the conclusion that strychnia may have been there, though
they did not find it, have arrived at that conclusion by experiments of
a very partial kind indeed; they contend that the poison of strychnia is
of that nature, that when once it has done its fatal work, and become
absorbed into the system, it ceases to be the thing which it was when it
was taken into the system; it becomes decomposed, its elements separated
from each other, and therefore no longer capable of responding to the
tests which, according to them, would certainly detect the poison of
undecomposed strychnia; that is their case. They account for the fact
that it was not found, and for their still retaining the belief that it
destroyed Mr. Cook, by that hypothesis. Now, it is only a hypothesis;
there is no foundation for it in experiment; it is not supported by the
evidence of any eminent toxicologist but themselves--it is due to them
to say, and to Dr. Taylor in particular to say, because it will be quite
out of my power to speak of Dr. Christison through any part of this
discussion except with the respect and consideration which is due to a
man of eminent acquirements and of the highest character; it is due to
Dr. Taylor to say that he does propound that theory in his book, but he
propounds it as a theory of his own; he does not vouch, as I remember,
any eminent toxicologist in support of it; and when we recollect that
his knowledge on the matter consists--good, humane man!--in having
poisoned five rabbits twenty-five years ago, and five since this
question of the guilt or innocence of Palmer arose, his opinion, I
think, unsupported by the opinions of others, cannot have much weight
with you; however, what I have to say now upon that point is, that I
will call before you many gentlemen of the highest eminence in their
profession, analytical chemists, to state to you their utter
renunciation of that theory. I will call before you Mr. Nunneley, a
Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons, and Professor of Surgery at
the Leeds School of Medicine, who attended that case of strychnia poison
that took place at Leeds, and to which we have agreed that no reference
shall be made by name. I will call before you Dr. Williams, Professor of
Materia Medica at the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, and surgeon
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