NOTICES OF NEW PUBLICATIONS, ON POISONS, IN RELATION TO MEDICAL JURISPRUDENCE AND MEDICINE. By ALFRED SWAINE TAYLOR, M.D., &c. Second Edition. London: Churchill. 1859.* Some of our readers might suppose that the word Poison was so clear in its meaning that no difficulty would arise from its use in common or scientific language. And yet so far is this from being the case, that we have never seen an adequate definition of the word. M. Bernard (in his "Leçons sur les Effets des Substances Toxiques,") says, a correct definition is impossible; but adds, that here, as in other instances where definition is most difficult, it is least requisite. The like reflection may have consoled Dr. Johnson, when he asked the pert midshipman what "poplolly was, and obtained for reply, that it was "what the poplolly man put into the poplolly locker." The medical practitioner at least will be aware that the same incapacity for definition belongs to the word "medicine." one," says Dr. Taylor, “can draw a definite boundary between a poison and a medicine," a fact to which they who have been much physicked can give ready credence. The greater number of poisons are useful medicines when properly employed, and "nearly every substance in the catalogue of medicine may be converted into an instrument of death, if improperly administered." The old proverb, indeed, that "what is one man's meat is another's poison," also confirms this view. - "No Let The popular notion of a poison is obviously too imperfect for scientific consideration; for that is commonly supposed to be a poison which, when administered in small quantity, tends to destroy life or health. However, a small dose of certain substances - - for instance, tartarized antimony is a medicine, while it is a poison when a large dose is administered. us take another instance that of common salt. In the small doses in which we all indulge, this substance is a food, and one which it would be cruel persecution to deprive us of; but if, like a self-doctoring young lady whose case is recorded, we were to swallow half-a-pound thereof, in a few hours later the coroner would sit on our bodies, and our heirs, executors, administrators, or creditors, as the case may be, would enter upon our estates, The nature of various substances, in a toxicological point of view, and the loose use of the term poison generally, is of no small practical importance. It is by no means uncommon for the counsel for the defence, in a charge of poisoning, in the cross-examination of a medical witness, to press upon him the question whether the material alleged to have been fatally used was strictly poison. Thus, in a case mentioned by Dr. Taylor, a woman named Whisker administered to a female, for a specific purpose, some white hellebore. Now this vegetable one medical witness hesitated to rank as a poison, because, though it was noxious to the human system, * From the London Law Magazine and Review. he knew of no case where it had produced death! So an objection was taken to the indictment, that hellebore was not poison. The judge thereupon is reported to have laid down the law to the jury, that what was in ordinary language understood to be a poison, was to be legally held to be such. The jury very properly found that white hellebore was a poison, and the prisoner was convicted. Thus, although it is a question for the jury to consider as to whether a particular drug or other substance is a poison, yet their verdict must be derived from the medical evidence. The mere question of a poison or medicine, may be illustrated by the case of a wretched woman called Rodanbosh, who, in 1856, was indicted for administering oil of turpentine to her infant. The defence was, that she thought it would cure its cough!— probably just as the guillotine is said to be a perfect remedy for squinting. Here the jury acquitted the prisoner. Again, in another case, emanating from that great poisoning county Essex, a woman escaped conviction because white precipitate was not proved on the trial to be a "poison or destructive thing," although it undoubtedly is both. This Although, as we have seen, it will be occasionally difficult for a medical man to say, abstractedly, that a certain drug or substance is poison, yet he will surely find it impossible to affirm that such has or has not "poisoned" a particular individual, or been destructive of his life. Thus, certain metals are not "poison"-iron or silver, for example; yet their introduction into the human body may be very "destructive to life." One recent instance is on record (Med. Soc., Lond., 1856), where a greedy boy, having been told to "take a spoon," did so - by swallowing a silver one seven inches long. Although, on all chirurgical grounds, this enfant terrible ought to have died, yet his life was preserved, and he was enabled, after a lapse of two years, honestly to restore to his anxious parents' platebasket the article he had thus curiously appropriated and secreted. incident ought not to be taken as a precedent for swallowing metal substances indiscriminately; for pieces of metal of much less size and importance are often destructive of life, e. g., copper coin, needles, and pins. The latter are used especially for the purpose of murdering young children; and although these articles occasionally fail to effect this object, when the intent to destroy is proved, no doubt can exist but that their administration is fellonious. If frequent recovery or instances of non-susceptibility could alter the character of the act of administration of any substance, no doubt the case recorded in the Medical Gazette (vol. 26), would have this effect in regard to pins and needles; for here no less than 254 were removed from a woman's body, most of which had been there some thirteen years. She was fortunate, however, in the sticking of her pins, and the mode in which the needles threaded their ways; for these useful little implements will sometimes penetrate the liver, carotid artery, or other equally important portion of the human frame. One old woman, for example, (also an inhabitant of Essex,) administered some pins to her grandchild eleven weeks old, one of which took up its abode altogether in its liver. This would have been fatal to the child, but its grandmother had also taken the precaution of causing it also to swallow some sponge and a piece of wood, to meet the contingency of the pins failing. This excellent woman was tried and acquitted by a Chelmsford jury! The statistics of death by poison in England are derived from the Registrar General's report, and are very interesting, though evidently imperfect. The average mortality (calculated from 1848 to 1853) amounts to 536 per annum. The death of the males is in great excess over that of the females every year, except in 1852, when the proportions are reversed in a manner most extraordinary, and totally unexplained. Assuming, with Dr. Taylor, that deaths ensue in not more than one case out of three of poisoning, we have about 1600 known cases of poisoning per annum. The statistics are, as we have said, undoubtedly imperfect; but they contain the best approximation we can arrive at as to the facts which render them useful. There is another table, derived from the returns of the inquisitions held by the coroners of England and Wales, of deaths occurring by poison during the years 1837 and 1838; but this makes it appear that there were about half the number of deaths by poison in 1837 that there were during a like period ten years later -a very improbable condition of circumstances. The coroners' returns, however, are useful as showing the comparative frequency in the use of various poisons. Thus : Deaths during two years were occasioned by various By arsenic By sulphuric acid By prussic acid 196 185 32 27 Hence, to opium we must refer the greater number of fatal poisonings; but of these the larger proportion arise from suicide or accident. Arsenic is the next common means of death in England, and is the agent most generally employed for felonious purposes. In France, arsenic is by far the most popular poison; its fatal employment equals that of all the rest put together; indeed some authorities say two-thirds of the deaths by poison in France are to be attributed to this mineral. Opium seems to be comparatively rarely used by our neighbors for either felonious or suicidal purposes. In Denmark, the national tendency appears to be towards vitriol -a most frightfully painful mode of exterminating life: it is employed chiefly by suicides and murderers of babies. Arsenic is the next in favor in Denmark. Another table return gives the astonishing fact, that out of seventy-five cases of poisoning by opium, forty-two occurred in children under five years of age! Indeed, out of deaths from "improper administration of medicine," no less than three-fourths befall young children. This is a strong corroboration of a fact well known to medical menignorance and stupid cruelty daily exercised upon the infantine world. Mothers and nurses between them destroy, directly and indirectly, a large proportion of the population annually born into the world. the gross More women commit suicide by poison than men-the proportion being 87 to 74. More men, on the other hand, are, by murder or accident, poisoned the proportion being 107 to 81. The hospital statistics with regard to poisonings require some explanation, which we hope Dr. Taylor will afford in the next edition of his book; for we see that of Guy's forty per cent. of the poisoned patients died- - i. e., two out of five- whilst at the Birmingham hospital only eight per cent., or one out of twelve, perish! Not only, however, are statistics, as here and as in various other instances, very anomalous and imperfect; but a strong impression is left on the mind, that through accident, ignorance, or villany, many cases of poisoning escape investigation and record. A nervous person might well feel alarmed at the perusal of Dr. Taylor's book. Supposing that he has no malicious person domiciled with him, skilled in the art of despatching foes by the herbs which grow around, or the drugs of the chemist's shop, yet the common soft water from the leaden cistern, as well as the costly old port-wine (decanted from the bottle whence all the shot had not been taken) the metal vessels in which his food is cooked *. - the food itself by adulteration or error- -the paper which brightens his walls, and the atmosphere which he inhales, may all contain latent weapons for his destruction. Poison, indeed, slays multitudes by modes unknown to themselves and neighbors. Dr. Taylor narrates that he nearly fell a victim to a baker. The morning rolls were observed to have something green sticking to the crust. The green was examined - it was only a little of the soft paint that came off from the shelf in the window. This paint on the bread only contained arsenic enough to have made the whole family capital illustrations for a posthumous edition of Dr. Taylor's book on poisons, under the head of accidental poisoning by arsenic. With the spread of knowledge many accidents and mischiefs may be prevented, as well as many improper suspicions averted. Symptoms are now more generally able to be referred to the causes in operation, and remedies are also better understood than they formerly were. When the use of certain violent drugs was known only to the initiated few, it was possible for them, if diabolically minded, to dispense mysterious deaths without suspicion, or at least free from detection. Brinvilliers ran a successful career of murder, and Anna Maria Zwanziger, (whose crimes are recorded by Feuerbach,) moving amongst ignorant and unsuspicious families, dealt, for many successive years, murder as she list. Indeed, there seems to be a stage in the career of the crime of poisoning when the process becomes one of peculiar fascination. It is carried on not merely for revengeful or covetous purposes, but in exercise of a secret power which gratifies the morbid soul of the horrid practitioner. Cases are recorded where the suffering victim is nursed and wept over by the wretch whose hand is daily administering the fatal and agonizing doses. Arsenic Thugs have been far less common than one would suppose; nor can the student of phsychology have a more curious subject for his consideration than such an instance of perverted feeling. There is one point in Dr. Taylor's book which we cannot help alluding to. We mean the controversial and personal tone which the author falls into too frequently-unless indeed it is unavoidable. In the present state of the practice of experts, and the morale of "professional witnesses," it may be true that an upright and honorable mind cannot avoid taking every opportunity of bitterly denouncing the abuse of scientific knowledge, and the disregard of the responsible office of assisting public justice, and securing private rights. Yet we wish the frequency of the attack and exposure of the conduct of certain well-known professional men, were not so perpetually recurring, and so broadly put forth. We are far from saying that the author condemns unfairly; but is it necessary in a standard work to adopt the bitter and pointed language which we are now noticing? We are fully aware of the evils he complains of; indeed, in an article in the Law Magazine for August, 1856, ("The Evidence in Palmer's case,") we have ourselves expressed our opinions strongly with regard to the disreputable mode in which medical evidence is proffered. We there have said "The witness-box seems to be sought by some as a cheap advertisement, by others as the means of contradicting or discomfiting a rival; but from whatever cause it may arise, the worst danger to the A clerical friend of ours had recently prepared in a copper, during hard times, some extraordinary good soup for the poor. This charity had nearly conducted some two or three score of his parishioners to some one of the other worlds. Simultaneous sickness drew attention to the cause, which was a dirty copper. administration of justice, and the greatest injury to the scientific character, will be incurred whenever it shall be known that professional witnesses may be retained to establish indifferently a case for either side. This is no fanciful danger; for we believe that there are few lawyers of considerable practice who could not within their experience give instances of the profligacy with which scientific testimony is tendered, and not in criminal cases only." (L. M. & R., Vol. I., N. S., p. 349.) And again: "That there have been frequent occasions when (to use Lord Campbell's expression) the medical witness is turned into the 'retained advocate,' is as true as it is grievous, and when such occasions occur they call for most unrelenting comment." It is not, therefore that we do not concur with the author in condemning notorious and scandalous misconduct of so-called scientific "professional" witnesses; but we think, in a standard work like Dr. Taylor's, contemporary culprits need not be so perpetually pilloried. We get tired of perpetually seeing notes of admiration placed after the assertions, doctrines, and imperfections of Dr. Letheby and Mr. Herepath. These seem to be Dr. Taylor's especial aversion, and their inconsistencies are frequent themes of observation. One effect of Dr. Taylor's remarks on this head will be, that every unscrupulous jail attorney or accomplice of felons, who seeks to have a case made out, got up, or carried through, has had plainly indicated to him that there is a market of "scientific evidence," where he can procure the testimony best suited to his wants. The observations of Dr. Taylor with reference to Palmer's case (and also illustrating the observations we have just made) are well worthy of perusal. He says: "That the prisoner was guilty of the foul crime of murdering his friend, no one who views the whole case apart from prejudice can entertain a reasonable doubt. A distinguished German who has commented on his trial, expresses his astonishment that any professional men could be found in England, who could stand forward and publicly state on oath that the symptoms under which Cook died might be explained by any form of nervous disease, epilepsy, or angina pectoris, (Dr. Hussemann in Reil's Journal, 1857, 4te Heft, p. 564.) It argues but little for the knowledge or moral feelings of medical witnesses, and must shake the confidence of the public, as it has already done to a great extent, in the trustworthiness of medical opinions. Such must be the result when scientific witnesses accept briefs for a defence; when they go into a witness-box believing one thing, and endeavor to lead a jury by their testimony to believe another-when they make themselves advocates, and deal in scientific subtleties, instead of keeping to the plain truth. Such men should be marked by the public, and their efforts at endeavoring to confer impunity on the foulest crimes, and to procure the acquittal of the most atrocious criminals, should be duly noted. The chemical defenders of the culprit Tawell on the apple pip' theory, (ante, p. 682,) were in the foremost rank to defend the culprit Palmer! Fortunately for society their efforts did not prove successful in either case. In the mean time, this pernicious system is a heavy blow and a great discouragement to the detection and exposure of murder by secret poisoning. No man in this country can henceforth venture to ⚫ denounce a grave crime of this kind, committed by a person of wealth or of social position, without being prepared to incur the most caluminous attacks, and to have his opinions and motives grossly misrepresented. If, after due consideration he boldly expresses his opinion at an inquest, and persists in it, he is said to be prejudiced; if he hesitates or expresses himself timidly, he is not to be trusted! There is but little protection afforded |