Chapter XIX: Part III (1)

The determination of the College concerning the Questions proposed to
them by the King’s Majestie about the death of _Joseph Lane_.

The College of Physicians in London being lawfully assembled by the command of their Sovereign Lord the King, about certain questions proposed concerning the death of _Joseph Lane_, reported to be killed by poison, and having made a diligent search, and well considering all circumstances relating; 1. As to the state of the body of the foresaid Lane; 2. As to the disease which (by a long series of violent symptoms) brought him to his end; 3. As to the kind and appearance of his death; 4. As to the observations made upon his dead body by the Physicians and Chirurgeons present; 5. As to the conjectures taken from the strict examination of a _bolus_ extremely suspicious, whose parts were artificially separated, found in Mr. _Lane_’s house when dead, and after brought into Court before the Judges, and from thence to the Physicians at their College: To whom (by the command and in the name of the King) Letters were wrote from the Right honourable Sir John Cooke principal Secretary of State that they might diligently enquire and give a faithful account to the following Questions, 1 Concerning Lane’s death, whether it was procured from Poison? 2 Their opinion about a purging potion carried the 4th of April, 1632 from Mr. _Mathews_ an Apothecary’s shop to _Lane’s_ House; and taken by Lane the 6th, whether it had any thing of poison in it? The College after very mature deliberation, did humbly present the following Decree to his sacred Majesty as a testimony of their obedience.

1 That the said _Joseph Lane_ did certainly dye of a violent death. 2 That he had taken poison, and that corrosive. 3 That they could determine nothing concerning the Potion sent and given by Mr. _Mathews_ the Apothecary to Mr. _Lane_ without the advice of any Physician, because many of their Medicines were too negligently prepared by their Servants; But if this potion did only consist of those ingredients which he had given an account of, and for which we have solely his word, then there was nothing of poison contained therein. 4. In the remainder of the aforesaid _Bolus_ there was found Mercury Sublimate, not sweet, but the most harsh and highly caustick, which was separated from the rest of the _Bolus_ and shown to the whole College; In testimony whereof the College by the unanimous Consent of the President and Fellows and all present at this consultation, signed this Decree with their own hands, and sealed it with the College Seal, that it might appear more authentick.

And because that from the beginning of the world to this very day good and wholesome Laws have derived their original from evil manners, the whole College of Physicians doe most humbly beseach your most sacred Majesty that as the Father of your Country, you would consult the health and welfare both of your City Subjects and would by your Royal Proclamation strictly command that for the future, No Grocer, Drugster, Apothecary, Chymist, or any other person presume to sell Arsenick, Quicksilver, Sublimate, Precipitate, Opium, Coloquintida, Scammony, Hellebore, or other Druggs either poisonous or dangerous, to poor sorry Women or poor people (which hath been too common) but only to those who are willing to give their names; that if there should be occasion they may give an account of the reason of their buying these dangerous medicines.

May it likewise please your Majesty to issue out your Royal Edict under the most severe penalties, that no Apothecary for the future shall dare to compound for the Well, or administer to the Sick any medicines, especially Vomits, Purges, Opiates, Mercurial or Antimonial remedies without the prescription of Physicians then living; which prescription they shall be bound to produce upon the command or request of the Censors of the College. He that shall act contrary, shall be punished by the Law as a publick enemy to the life of man. Dated from the College of Physicians in London the Last day of May 1632 And subscribed

Dr. ARGENT President
(and seventeen others)

(_See Goodall’s Proceedings_)

Case of Standsfield.

Edinburgh Dec^r 1. 1687.

We under Subscribers, James Craufurd and James Muirhead, Chirurgeons in Edinburgh, having order from Sir John Dalrymple his Majesty’s Advocate, to go to Morum and there to take up the Corps of Sir James Standsfield, and to sight and view the same exactly, and if need were, to open up the body, and to consider whether there appeared any evidence of wounds, bruises, or strangling upon the Corps, besides what might have happened by his falling or drowning in the water, &c. In obedience thereto, we caused take up the said corps in the presence of “(here follow the names)” indwellers in New Milns, and some others. Having with all possible exactness viewed the corps we observed the face a little swelled, and inclining to a dark reddish colour, some fulness of some capillarie veins in the pallet of the mouth towards the uvula, as also a large and conspicuous swelling, about three inches broad, of a dark red or blue colour, from one side of the larinx round backwards to the other side thereof; we observed the jugular veins on both sides the neck very large and distended and full of blood; there was a large swelling under and betwixt the chin and the cartilago scutiformis; there was also a little scratch below the left mandibula, which had rankled the cuticula, and made some little impression on the cutis: Having made incission from the chin down about the larinx, and cross upon the swelling of the neck, we found a greater laxness and distance (as we think) than ordinary betwixt the cartilago scutiformis and os hyoides; we found the tumour on the neck, containing bruised, like dark or blackish blood; the jugulars, when cut, bled inconsiderably especially that on the left side.

Having opened his breast we found the lungs distended to the filling up their capacities, but free of water: his stomach, liver &c. were all in good condition; we found no water at all; the breast, belly, privy parts, &c. were all well coloured, there was no swelling in his belly, nor any thing by ordinary to be seen on his head. This we attest and subscribe with our hands.

James Craufurd
James Murehead

Report of the Chirurgeons of Edinburgh on the same case.

We under subscribers, Chirurgeons of Edinburgh, having fully considered the report made by James Craufurd and James Murehead concerning the condition of the corps of Sir James Standsfield, and though it be not usual to declare more than matter of fact, yet in obedience to your Lordships commands, where ye desire to be informed, if these symptoms found upon the body, do import drowning or strangling; we humbly offer opinion, so far as our art or experience will allow. And whereas the report informs us, that there was found a swelling and preternatural redness in the face, a large conspicuous tumour, about three inches broad, of a dark red, or black colour, from the one side of the larynx round backwards to the other side thereof, a large swelling betwixt the chin and the cartilago scutiformis, the jugular veins on both sides very much distended; and when incision was made downwards between the os hyoid and larinx was observed a laxness, and distance between the os hyoid and the cartilago scutiformis, incision was made cross alongst the tumour it was found full of bruised blood; the jugulars likewise, when opened, yielded a considerable quantity of blood, especially on the left side, no smell or corruption appearing in any part of the body. It is very probable these parts have suffered some external violence, which hath made them appear so far different from their natural figure and colour, and could not be caused by drowning simply. As to the other part of the report, the breast and belly being opened, the lungs found distended, the bronchi full of air, without any water, nor any water found in the stomach or intestines, a body when drowned being generally found to have much water in it with other circumstances of the report considered, gives just ground to think he was not drowned. This we subscribe at Edinburgh the 3d day of Feb^y 1687

John Ballie, Deacon,
Wil Borthwick
George Stirling
Thomas Edgar
James Craufurd
James Murehead

The Report of the College of Physicians,

Edinburgh February 6: 1687

The College of Physicians being assembled at the desire of his Majesty’s Advocat, to consider a report made by some Chirurgeons, concerning the body of the late Sir James Standsfield, and to give their opinion, whether by the said report, there is any just ground to believe that the said Sir James Standsfield was strangled or drowned? And they have accordingly considered the said report. They are of opinion, supposing the verity of the said report or declaration that there is sufficient ground to believe, that the said Sir James Standsfield was strangled, and not drowned. In testimony whereof these presents are subscribed by

Sir Andrew Balfour, President of the said College.

A. Balfour PCRM

(_From Howell’s State Trials_).

Extract from Medical Evidence in the Case of _Spencer Cowper_, Esq. for
the murder of _Sarah Stout_.

(13 Howell’s State Trials)

Page 1126. Mr. _Coatsworth_ a Surgeon sworn

My Lord in April last I was sent for by Dr. _Philips_ to come to Hertford to see the body of Mrs. _Stout_ opened, who had been six weeks buried; and he told me that there was a suspicion she was murdered, and that her relations were willing to have her taken up and opened. I came down I think on the 27th of April, and lay at Mrs. _Stout_’s house that night; and by her discourse I understood she wanted to be satisfied, whether her daughter was with child? I told her, it was my opinion we should find the parts contained in the abdomen so rotten, that it would be impossible to discover the uterus from the other parts; however, if she would have her opened, I could not discover whether she was with child, unless the infant was become bony. Her face and neck, to her shoulders, appeared black, and so much corrupted that we were unwilling to proceed any further: but, however, her mother would have it done, and so we did open her; and as soon as she was opened, we perceived the stomach and guts were as full of wind as if they had been blown with a pair of bellows; we put her guts aside, and came to the uterus, and Dr. _Philips_ shewed it us in his hand, and afterwards cut it out and laid it on the table, and opened it, and we saw into the cavity of it, and if there had been any thing there as minute as a hair, we might have seen it, but it was perfectly free and empty; after that we put the intestines into their places; and we bid him open the stomach, and it was opened with an incision knife, and it sunk flat, and let out wind, but no water; afterwards we opened the breast and lobes of the lungs, and there was no water; then we looked on each side and took up the lobes of the lungs too, to see if there was no water in the diaphragm, and there was none, but all dry. Then I remember I said, this woman could not be drowned, for if she had taken in water, the water must have rotted all the guts: that was the construction I made of it then; but for any marks about her head and neck, it was impossible for us to discover it, because they were so rotten.

_Edward Clement_ (a seaman) sworn. In the year 89 or 90, in Beachy fight, I saw several thrown over-board during the engagement, but one particularly I took notice of, that was my friend, and killed by my side; I saw him swim for a considerable distance from the ship; and a ship coming under our stern, caused me to lose sight of him, but I saw several dead bodies floating at the same time; likewise in another engagement, where a man had both his legs shot off, and died instantly, they threw over his legs; though they sunk I saw his body float: likewise I have seen several men who have died natural deaths at sea, they have when they have been dead, had a considerable weight of ballast and shot made fast to them, and so were thrown overboard; because we hold it for a general rule, that all men swim if they be dead before they come into the water; and on the contrary, I have seen men when they have been drowned, that they have sunk as soon as their breath was out of their bodies, and I could see no more of them. For instance, a man fell out of the Cornwall, and sunk down to rights, and seven days afterwards we weighed anchor, and he was brought up grasping his arm about the cable: and we have observed in several cases, that where men fall overboard, as soon as their breath is out of their bodies they sink downright; and on the contrary, where a dead body is thrown over-board without weight, it will swim. * * * Men (that are killed) float with their heads just down, and the small of their backs and buttocks upwards, * * * why should government be at that vast charge to allow threescore or fourscore weight of iron to sink any man, but only that their swimming about should not be a discouragement to others.

_Robert Dew_ sworn—* * * (Question by the Prisoner) After she was taken out, did you observe any froth or foam come from her mouth or nose? _Dew_—There was a white froth came from her, and as they wiped it away, it was on again presently.

—— _Young_—(another witness to a similar question)—* * And when they had taken her up (out of the water) they laid her down upon a green place, and after she was laid down a great quantity of froth, like the froth of new beer, worked out of her nostrils. * * * It rose up in bladders, and ran down on the sides of her face, and so rose again.

Dr. _Sloane_ sworn—* * As to my opinion of drowning it is plain, that if a great quantity of water be swallowed into the stomach by the gullet, it will not suffocate or drown the person: Drunkards who swallow a great deal of liquor, and those who are forced by the civil law to drink a great quantity of water, which in giving the question (as it is called) is poured into them by way of torture to make them confess crimes, have no suffocation or drowning happen to them: But on the other hand, when any quantity comes into the wind-pipe, so as it does hinder or intercept inspiration, or coming in of the air, which is necessary for inspiration or breathing, the person is suffocated. Such a small quantity will do, as sometimes in prescriptions, when people have been very weak, or forced to take medicines, I have observed some spoonfuls in that condition (if it went the wrong way) to have choaked or suffocated the person. I take drowning in a great measure to be thus, and when one struggles he may, to save himself from being choaked, swallow some quantity of water, yet that is not the cause of his death, but that which goes into the wind-pipe and lungs. Whether a person comes dead or alive into the water, I believe some quantity will go into the wind-pipe; and I believe without force after death, little will get into the stomach, because that it should, swallowing is necessary, which after death cannot be done. * * *

Baron _Hatsell_. But what do you say to this? if there had been water in the body, would it not have putrified the parts after it had lain six weeks.

Dr. _Sloane_. My Lord, I am apt to think it would have putrified the stomach less than the lungs, because the stomach is a part of the body that is contrived by nature partly to receive liquids; but the contrivance of the lungs is only for the receiving of air; they being of a spongy nature, the water might sink more into them than the stomach; but I believe it might putrify there too after some time. I am apt to think, that when a body is buried under ground, according to the depth of the grave, and difference of the weather and soil, the fermentation may be greater or lesser, and that according to the several kinds of meats or liquids in the stomach, the putrifaction will likewise vary so that it seems to me to be very uncertain.

Baron _Hatsell_. But when they are in a coffin, how is it then?

Dr. _Sloane_. No doubt there will be a fermentation more or less, according as the air comes more or less to the body. Indeed it may be otherwise where the air is wholly shut out, which is supposed to be the way of embalming, or preserving of dead bodies of late, without the use of any spices, which is thought in a great measure to be brought about by the closeness of the coffin, and hindering of the air from coming into the body.

Question (by the Prisoner). Is it possible, in your judgment, for any water to pass into the thorax?

Dr. _Sloane_. I believe it is hardly possible, that any should go from the wind-pipe into the cavity of the thorax, without great violence and force; for there is a membrane that covers the outside of the lungs, that will hinder the water from passing through it into any part without them.

Dr. _Garth_ sworn.—* * * All dead bodies (I believe) fall to the bottom, unless they be prevented by some extraordinary tumour. * * * I believe when she threw _herself_ in, she might not struggle to save herself, and by consequence not sup up much water. Now there is no direct passage into the stomach but by the gullet, which is contracted or pursed up by a muscle in nature of a sphincter: for if this passage was always open like that of the wind-pipe, the weight of the air would force itself into the stomach, and we should be sensible of the greatest inconveniences. * * * My Lord, I think we have reason to suspect the Seaman’s evidence; for he saith that threescore pound of iron is allowed to sink dead bodies, whereas six or seven pounds would do as well; * * the design of tying weights to their bodies, is to prevent their floating at all, which otherwise would happen in some few days.[182]

Dr. _Morley_, the next witness, related some experiments on animals.

Dr. _Wollaston_, sworn.—* * I saw two men that were drowned out of the same boat. They were taken up the next day after they were drowned; one of them was indeed prodigiously swelled, so much that his clothes were burst in several places of his sides and arms, and his stockings in the seams * * the other was not the least swelled in any part nor discolored; he was as lank, I believe, as ever he was in his lifetime, and there was not the least sign of any water in him, except the watery froth at his mouth and nostrils.[183]

Mr. _W. Cooper_, sworn.—* * Dead bodies necessarily sink in water, if no distention of their parts buoy them up; this distention sometimes happens before death, at other times soon after, and in bodies that are drowned after they lie under water.

Dr. _Crell_, sworn.—My Lord, it must be reading, as well as a man’s own experience, that will make any one a Physician: for without the reading of books in that art, the art itself cannot be attained to: besides, my Lord, I humbly conceive, that in such a difficult case as this, we ought to have a great deference for the reports and opinions of learned men: neither do I see any reason why I should not quote the fathers of my profession in this case, as well as you gentlemen of the long robe quote _Coke_ upon _Littleton_ in others. * * I shall only insist on what _Ambrose Pare_ relates in his Chapter of Renunciations. * *

Mr. _Harriot_ (a Naval Surgeon) sworn.—* * When we threw men overboard that were killed, some of them swam and some sunk * * (when a dead body is thrown overboard) I always observed that it did sink. * *

Mr. _Bartlet_ (a Naval Surgeon), sworn.—* * I never saw any bodies float, either of the men that were killed in our ship, or in the ships that have been near us; I have not seen a body on the surface of the water.

--------------

We have merely made comparatively short extracts from this trial, as more copious quotations, both of the evidence, and pamphlets subsequently published, would have occupied too great a space. The whole will be found in _Howell’s State Trials_, and is well worthy of the attention of the Medical or Legal reader.

-------

Extracts from the Evidence of Doctor Anthony Addington, on the trial of _Mary Blandy_ at Oxford 1752, for the Murder of her Father by Arsenic.

Dr. Anthony Addington & Dr. William Lewis sworn.

_Counsel._ Did you, Dr. Addington, attend Mr. Blandy in his last illness?

_Dr. Addington._ Yes, Sir.

_C._ When was you called to him the first time?

_Dr. A._ On Saturday evening August the 10th.

_C._ In what condition did you find him?

_Dr. A._ He was in bed; and told me, that after drinking some gruel on Monday night, August the 5th, he had perceived an extraordinary grittiness in his mouth, attended with a very painful burning and pricking in his tongue, throat, stomach, and bowels, and with sickness and gripings; which symptoms had been relieved by fits of vomiting and purging.

_C._ Were those fits owing to any physic he had taken or to the gruel?

_Dr. A._ Not to any physic; they came on very soon after taking the gruel.

_C._ Had he taken no physic that day?

_Dr. A._ No.

_C._ Did he make any further complaints?

_Dr. A._ He said, that, after drinking more gruel on Tuesday night August the 6th, he had felt the grittiness in his Mouth again, and that the burning and pricking in his tongue, throat, stomach and bowels, had returned with double violence and had been aggravated by a prodigious swelling of the belly, and exquisite pains and prickings in every external as well as internal part of his body, which prickings he compared to an infinite number of needles darting into him all at once.

_C._ How soon after drinking the gruel?

_Dr. A._ Almost immediately. He told me likewise, that at the same time, he had had cold sweats, hiccup, extreme restlessness and anxiety; but that then, viz. on Saturday night August the 10th, having had a great many stools, and some bloody ones, he was pretty easy every where, except in his mouth, lips, nose, eyes, and fundament; and except some transient gripings in his bowels. I asked him, to what he imputed those uneasy sensations in his mouth, lips, nose, and eyes? he said to the fumes of something he had taken in his gruel on Monday night August the 5th, and Tuesday night August the 6th.

On inspection, I found his tongue swelled and his throat slightly inflamed and excoriated. His lips especially the upper one were dry and rough, and had angry pimples on them. The inside of his nostrils was in the same condition. His eyes were a little blood-shot. Besides these appearances, I observed that he had a low, trembling, intermitting pulse; a difficult unequal respiration; a yellowish complexion; a difficulty in the utterance of his words; and an inability of swallowing even a tea-spoonful of the thinnest liquor at a time.

As I suspected that these appearances and symptoms were the effect of poison, I asked Miss Blandy whether Mr. Blandy had lately given offence to either of his servants or clients or any other person? She answered _That he was at Peace with all the World, and that all the World was at Peace with him_. I then asked her whether he had ever been subject to complaints of this kind before? She said, that he had often been subject to the cholic and heart-burn; and that she supposed this was only a fit of that sort, and would soon go off as usual. I told Mr. Blandy that I asked these questions because I suspected that by some means or other he had taken poison. He replied, _It might be so_, or in words to that effect: but Miss Blandy said _It was impossible_.

On Saturday morning August the 10th, he seemed much relieved; his pulse, breath, complexion, and power of swallowing, were greatly mended. He had had several stools in the night and no blood in them. The complaints which he had made of his mouth, lips, nose, and eyes were lessened; but he said the pain in his fundament continued and that he still felt some pinchings in his bowels. On viewing his fundament I found it almost surrounded with gleety Excoriations and Ulcers.

About eight o’clock this Morning I took my leave of him, but before I quitted the room, Miss Blandy desired I would visit him again the next day.

When I got down stairs, one of the maids put a paper into my hands, which she said Miss Blandy had thrown into the kitchen fire, several holes were burnt in the paper but not a letter of the superscription was effaced. The Superscription was, _The Powder to clean the Pebbles with_.

_C._ What is the maid’s name that gave you that paper?

_Dr. A._ I cannot recollect which of the maids it was that gave it to me. I opened the paper very carefully, and found in it a whitish powder, like white arsenic in taste, but slightly discoloured by a little burnt paper mixed with it. I cannot swear this powder was arsenic or any other poison, because the quantity was too small to make any experiment with, that could be depended on.

_C._ What do you really suspect it to be?

_Dr. A._ I really suspect it to be white arsenic.

_C._ Please to proceed Sir.

_Dr. A._ As soon as the maid had left me, Mr. Norton the Apothecary produced a powder, that, he said had been found at the bottom of that mess of gruel, which, as was supposed had poisoned Mr. Blandy. He gave me some of that powder, and I examined it at my leisure, and believe it to be white arsenic.

On Monday morning August the 12th I found Mr. Blandy much worse than I had left him the day before, his bowels were still in pain.

I now desired that another Physician might be called in, as I apprehended Mr. Blandy to be in the utmost danger, and that this affair might come before a Court of Judicature. Dr. Lewis was then sent for from Oxford. I staid with Mr. Blandy all this day. I asked him more than once whether he really thought he had taken poison? He answered each time, that he believed he had. I asked him whether he thought he had taken poison often? He answered in the affirmative. His reasons for thinking so, were, because some of his teeth had decayed much faster than was natural; and because he had frequently for some months past, especially after his daughter had received a present of _Scotch Pebbles_ from Mr. _Cranstoun_, been affected with very violent and unaccountable prickings and heats in his tongue and throat, and with most intolerable burnings, and pains in his stomach and bowels, which used to go off in vomitings and purgings. I asked him whom he suspected to be the giver of the poison? The tears stood in his eyes; yet he forced a smile and said—_A poor Love-sick Girl—I forgive her—I always thought there was mischief in those cursed Scotch Pebbles_.

Dr. Lewis came about eight o’clock in the evening. Before he came Mr. Blandy’s complexion, pulse, breath, and faculty of Swallowing were got much better again; but he complained more of pain in the fundament.

* * * *

_Dr. Addington._ On Tuesday morning August the 13th, we found him worse again. His countenance, pulse, breath and power of swallowing, were extremely bad. He was excessively weak. His hands trembled. Both they and his face were cold and clammy. The pain was intirely gone from his bowels, but not from his fundament. He was now and then a little delirious. He had frequently a short cough, and a very extraordinary elevation of his chest, in fetching his breath; on which occasions an ulcerous matter generally issued from his fundament. Yet in his sensible intervals, he was cheerful and jocose; He said, _He was like a Person bit by a Mad Dog; for that he should be glad to drink, but could not swallow_.

About noon this day his speech faultered more and more. He was sometimes very restless, at others very sleepy. His face was quite ghastly. This night was a terrible one.

On Wednesday morning, August the 14th, he recovered his senses for an hour or more. He told me, he would make his will in two or three days; but he soon grew delirious again; and sinking every moment, died about Two o’Clock in the afternoon.

_C._ Upon the whole, did you then think, from the symptoms you have described, and the observations you made, that Mr. Blandy died by poison?

_Dr. A._ Indeed I did.

_C._ And it is your present opinion?

_Dr. A._ It is; and I have never had the least occasion to alter it. His case was so particular that he had not a symptom of any consequence, but what other persons have had, who have taken White Arsenic; and, after death, had no appearance (_except a stone in the Gall bladder_) in his body, but what other persons have had, who have been destroyed by white arsenic.

_C._ When was his body opened?

_Dr. A._ On Tuesday in the afternoon, August the 15th.

_C._ What appeard on opening it?

_Dr. A._ I committed the appearances to writing, and should be glad to read them, if the Court will give me leave.

Then the Doctor, on leave given by the Court, read as follows:

Mr. Blandy’s back and the hinder part of his arms, thighs, and legs were livid. That fat which lay on the muscles of his belly, was of a loose texture, inclining to a state of fluidity. The muscles of his belly were very pale and flaccid. The cawl was yellower than is natural; and on the side next the stomach and intestines looked brownish. The heart was variegated with purple spots. There was no water in the pericardium. The lungs resembled bladders half filled with air and blotted in some places with pale but in most with black ink. The liver and spleen were much discoloured; the former looked as if it had been boiled, but that part of it which covered the stomach was particularly dark. A stone was found in the gall-bladder. The bile was very fluid and of a dirty yellow colour, inclining to red. The kidneys were all over stained with livid spots. The stomach and bowels were inflated, and appeared, before any incision was made into them, as if they had been pinched, and extravasated blood had stagnated between their membranes. They contained nothing, as far as we examined, but a slimy bloody froth. Their coats were remarkably smooth, thin, and flabby. The wrinkles of the stomach were totally obliterated. The internal coat of the stomach and duodenum, especially about the orifices of the former, were prodigiously inflamed and excoriated. The redness of the white of the eye, in a violent inflammation of that part, or rather the white of the eye just brushed and bleeding with the beards of barley, may serve to give some idea how this coat had been wounded. There was no schirrus in any gland of the abdomen; no adhesion of the lungs to the pleura; nor indeed the least trace of a natural decay in any part whatever.

-------

(Dr. Lewis confirmed this part of the Evidence.)

-------

Dr. Addington Cross examined.

* * * *

_Prisoners Counsel._ Why do you believe it to be White Arsenic?

_Dr. A._ For the following Reasons: 1. This Powder has a milky Whiteness; so has White Arsenic. 2. This is gritty and almost insipid; so is White Arsenic. 3. Part of it swims on the surface of cold water like a pale sulphureous film; but the greatest part sinks to the bottom, and remains there undissolved; the same is true of white arsenic. 4. This thrown on red hot iron, does not flame, but rises entirely in thick white fumes, which have the stench of garlick; and cover cold iron held just over them, with white flowers; white arsenic does the same. 5. I boiled ten grains of this powder in four ounces of clean water, and then, passing the decoction through a filtre, divided into five equal parts, which were put into as many glasses: Into one glass I poured a few drops of Spirit of Sal Ammoniac; into another some of the Lixivium of Tartar; into the third some strong Spirit of Vitriol; into the fourth some Spirit of Salt; and into the last some Syrup of Violets. The Spirit of Sal Ammoniac threw down a few particles of pale sediment. The Lixivium of Tartar gave a white cloud, which hung a little about the middle of the glass. The Spirits of Vitriol and Salt made a considerable precipitation of a lightish coloured substance; which in the former, hardened into glittering chrystals, sticking to the sides and bottom of the glass. Syrup of Violets produced a beautiful pale green tincture. Having washed the saucepan, funnel, and glasses, used in the foregoing experiments, very clean, and provided a fresh filtre, I boiled ten grains of white arsenic bought of Mr. Wilcock, Druggist in Reading, in four ounces of clean water; and filtering it and dividing it into five equal parts, proceeded with them just as I had done with the former decoction. There was an exact similitude between the experiments made on the two decoctions. They corresponded so nicely on each trial, that I declare I never saw any two things in Nature more alike, than the decoction made with the powder found in Mr. Blandy’s gruel, and that made with white arsenic. From the experiments, and others, which I am ready to produce, if desired, I believe that powder to be White Arsenic.

* * * *

She had put a little of it into his cup of tea; but that he never drank it; that part of the powder swimming at top of the tea, and part sinking at the bottom, she had poured it out of the window.

See Hargrave’s State Trials. Vol. 10.

Extracts from the Evidence delivered on the Trial of _John Donellan_,
Esq. for the Wilful Murder, by Poison, of Sir _Theodosius Edward
Allesley Boughton_, Bart. at the Assizes at Warwick, on Friday, March
30th, 1781.

(_Taken in Short-hand by J. Gurney._)

-------

EVIDENCE FOR THE CROWN.

_Lady Anna Maria Boughton_, Mother of the deceased, Sworn—Examined by
Mr. Howorth.

Q. Give the Jury an account of the physic you gave him, and the manner of its operation.

A. I asked him where the bottle was: he said it stood there upon the shelf. First of all he desired me to get him a bit of cheese in order to take the taste out of his mouth, which I did: he desired me to read the lable; I accordingly did, and found there was written upon it, _Purging draught for Sir Theodosius Boughton_.

Q. When you gave him the draught, did he make any, and what observations upon it?

A. As I was talking to him I omitted shaking the bottle: he, observing that, said, Pour it back again, and shake the bottle, and in so doing I spilt part of it upon the table; the rest I gave him. As he was taking it, he observed it smelt and tasted very nauseous; upon which I said, I think it smells very strongly like bitter almonds. I gave him the cheese; he chewed it, and spit it out. He then remarked that he thought he should not be able to keep the medicine upon his stomach. I asked him if he would have some water; I gave him some. He washed his mouth, and spit that out, and then laid down.

Q. Please to open that bottle, [giving Lady Boughton the genuine draught] and smell at it, and inform the Court whether that smells at all like the medicine Sir Theodosius took.

A. No, it does not.

Q. Please to smell to this, [giving Lady Boughton the draught with the laurel water added to it.]

A. This has a smell very like the smell of the medicine which I gave him.

Q. What was the first observation your Ladyship made of any appearances upon Sir Theodosius after taking the medicine?

A. In two minutes, or two minutes and a half, after he had taken it, he struggled very much; it appeared to me, as if it was to keep it down; and made a prodigious rattling in his stomach, and guggling; and he appeared to me to make very great efforts to keep it down.

_Court._ How did he make a rattling?

A. A noise in his stomach as if it would come up again.

Q. How long did you observe these symptoms continue?

A. About ten minutes; he then seemed as if he was going to sleep, or inclined to dose. Perceiving him a little composed, I went out of the room. I returned in about five minutes after into his room; then, to my great surprise, I found him with his eyes fixed upwards, his teeth clenched, and froth running out of each corner of his mouth.

Q. What did you do upon that?

A. I ran down stairs, and told the servant to take the first horse he could get, and go immediately for Mr. Powell, the Apothecary.

Q. Was any other person sent for?

A. No.

Q. When did you first see Mr. Donellan after that?

A. I saw him in less than five minutes; he came up to the bed chamber where my son was, and asked me, What do you want? I said I wanted to inform him what a terrible thing had happened; that it was an unaccountable thing in the doctor to send such a medicine, for if it had been taken by a dog, it would have killed him; and I did not think my son would live. He asked in what manner Sir Theodosius was taken; and I told him. Then he asked me where the physic bottle was? I shewed him the two draughts. He took up one of the bottles and said, Is this it? Yes, said I. He took it up, poured some water out of the water bottle, which was just by, into the phial, shook it, and then emptied it out into some dirty water which was in a wash-hand bason.

Q. Did you make any observation upon that conduct?

A. After he had thrown the contents of the first bottle into the wash-hand bason of dirty water, I observed that he ought not to do that: I said, What are you at? you should not meddle with the bottle. Upon that he snatched up the other bottle, and poured water into it, and shook it; then he put his finger to it, and tasted it. I said, What are you about? you ought not to meddle with the bottles. Upon which he said, I did it to taste it.

Q. Had he tasted the first bottle?

A. No.

_Catharine Amos_ sworn. Examined by Mr. Geast.

Q. Did you live at Lawford-hall at the time of the death of Sir Theodosius Boughton?

A. Yes.

Q. In what capacity?

A. I was cook.

Q. Was you sent for by Lady Boughton?

A. I was sent for to my lady, by the other maid, Sarah Blundell, who is dead. I was called up stairs into that room where Sir Theodosius lay.

Q. When you came into the room in what situation was Sir Theodosius Boughton?

A. He did not stir hand or foot, but frothed at his mouth. I wiped the froth four or five times from his mouth.

Q. Was the body motionless?

A. The stomach heaved very much.

Q. Was there any noise?

A. He guggled at the throat.

Q. Give an account of any other circumstances that you observed?

A. I did not observe any thing more.

Q. Where did you go to from thence?

A. I went below stairs about my work. My work lay below stairs.

Q. How long afterwards was it before you saw Mr. Donellan?

A. It might be about a quarter of an hour. I saw him in the passage. Mr. Donellan said, Sir Theodosius was out very late over night a fishing, that it was very silly of him, as he had been taking such physick as he had been taking of, before time.

Q. That is before that time?

A. Yes.

Q. Did he give any reason why he had been out so late a fishing?

A. No.

Q. Did he say any thing more at that time?

A. Not to the best of my knowledge.

Q. Did you see Mr. Donellan the day that the body was opened?

A. Yes.

Q. What did Mr. Donellan say at that time?

A. He said there was nothing the matter, that it was a blood-vessel had broke which had occasioned Sir Theodosius’s death.

Q. Did Mr. Donellan bring any thing to you at or about the time of Sir Theodosius’s death?

A. No.

Q. At any time before his death?

A. No, nothing at all.

Q. Did he never bring you any thing for any purpose?

A. No.

Q. Was any thing brought to you by Mr. Donellan within a fortnight or three weeks before the death of Sir Theodosius Boughton?

A. No.

_Counsel for the Prisoner to Lady Boughton._ Did Sir Theodosius Boughton speak at all after he had taken the medicine?

_Lady Boughton._ Not at all.

_Mr. Geast to Catharine Amos._ You said you was cook maid?

A. Yes.

Q. Was the oven under your direction?

A. Yes.

Q. Was any thing brought to you at any time?

A. Yes, a still.

Q. Who brought it?

A. Mr. Donellan.

Q. When was it?

A. Sometime after Sir Theodosius’s death.

Q. How long after?

A. To the best of my remembrance it might be a fortnight.

Q. What was there in it?

A. Nothing. It had been washed. He desired me to put it into the oven to dry it, that it might not rust; I said if I put it in then it would unsolder it, as it was made of tin.

_Dr. Rattray_ sworn. Examined by Mr. Balguy.

Q. You are, I believe, a Physician at Coventry?

A. I am.

* * * * * * * *

Q. How soon after this was it that you was again sent for upon this melancholy occasion?

A. On the 9th of September; I think it was on a Saturday.

Q. Who did you receive a message from at that time?

A. I really do not know; I received a message by some strange round-about way, in consequence of which I went, but I don’t know who sent it. Mr. Wilmer and I went in company; we met Mr. Bucknill, Mr. Powell, of Rugby, and Mr. Snow, of Southam; those were all the physical people I believe. Mr. Bucknill opened the body.

Q. Where did you meet at that time?

A. In the church-yard at Newbold.

Q. The body had then been interred?

A. It had been in the vault at Newbold as I understood.

Q. What passed at that time?

A. We proceeded to the opening of the body as soon as we conveniently could, and inspected as far as we were able the appearances of the body.

Q. What were the material appearances that struck you at that time?

A. The material appearances where, in the first place, the body appeared upon a general view swoln or distended a good deal; the face of a round figure extremely black, with the lips swelled and retracted and shewing the gums; the teeth black except a small white speck on one of the fore teeth; the tongue protruding beyond the fore teeth, and turning upwards towards the nose; the blackness descended upon the throat, gradually diminishing as it got towards the breast, and the body was spotted in many parts but not very material. There was another circumstance which for decency I have omitted, but if called upon I am ready to mention.

_Mr. Balguy._ That circumstance is not at all material. I meant to ask you merely to such appearances as were material. Were there any appearances upon the body sufficient to cause or confirm an opinion you may by and by give upon the subject?

A. We proceeded to open the body, and in dissecting the skin the fat appeared in a dissolving state a little watery; on getting into the cavity of the belly the bowels in the lower belly seemed to put on the appearance of inflammation. I choose to make use of the valgar term _appearance_, in order to convey a general idea of the appearance things in that state generally put on.

Q. Was it so with the stomach too?

A. Yes: the orifices of the stomach and the small arch of the stomach; the heart upon opening the pericardium, the membrane which encloses it, appeared to be in a natural state; the lungs appeared what I call suffused with blood, looking red and spotted in many places with black specks; and on the back part the blood had settled in a deep red colour, almost approaching to purple; the diaphragm was in the same state, and in general upon the depending surfaces of the body the blood was settled in the like manner; the kidneys appeared black as tinder, and the liver much in the same state. These I think are most of the appearances I need mention upon the present occasion.

Q. Have you heard the evidence of Mr. Powell, the apothecary?

A. I have.

Q. And have heard too the evidence of Lady Boughton?

A. I have.

Q. Now from the evidence of Mr. Powell and the evidence of Lady Boughton, independent of appearances, for I would have you forget them for the present instant; what was in your judgment the occasion of Sir Theodosius Boughton’s death?

A. Independent of the appearances of the body, I am of opinion that the draught, in consequence of the symptoms which succeeded the swallowing of it, as described by Lady Boughton, was poison; and the immediate cause of his death.

Q. Please to smell upon that bottle; what in your judgment is the noxious medicine in that bottle?

A. I know the liquid well; it is a distillation of laurel leaves, commonly called laurel water.

Q. You have heard Mr. Powell’s account of the mixture he prepared for Sir Theodosius Boughton; was the mixture innocent and proper?

A. In my opinion it was perfectly innocent.

Q. You have said that in your judgment laurel water is contained in this bottle?

A. Yes.

Q. Have you made any particular experiments upon the effects of laurel water?

A. I have several.

Q. You will please to relate the particular experiments you have made, and the appearances in consequence of those experiments?

A. Mr. Wilmer and I made experiments together; our first experiment with laurel water was upon a middle sized dog; I held his mouth open and there was I believe nearly two ounces of laurel water poured down his throat. I held the dog between my knees: in half a minute as nearly as I can guess, he dropped dead to the ground without any motion, except a tremulous motion once or twice of the lower jaw. The next animal on which I tried the laurel water was likewise in company with Mr. Wilmer. To an aged mare, we gave at repeated intervals out of an horn, I believe about a pint and an half of laurel water In about two minutes she was precipitated to the ground with her head under her, and then tumbled on her back kicking violently; she afterwards lay without kicking but seemed convulsed, her eyes rolling about, rearing up her head as if in agonies, gulping at her stomach as if something lay there exceeding offensive to her; and at that instant and during the whole time she lived afterwards, heaving in the flanks in a most extraordinary manner, and at the end of fifteen minutes she expired. After this in company with Mr. Ewbank of Coventry, I gave to a cat about a spoonful of laurel water which I had myself seen distilled; it was pale and limpid as pure distilled waters, and seemed very weak. The cat though I believe she had not half the quantity I intended she should have taken, died in three minutes.

Q. What quantity did you pour down the cat’s throat?

A. About a spoonful, about half an ounce. At Southam, the beginning of this week, I gave in presence of Mr. Snow, to another aged horse, about a pint of laurel water, distilled by Mr. Snow. Upon his receiving into his stomach the first horn full, which was a small one, no bigger than we used in the former experiment, he dropped to the ground.

_Court._ What was the quantity that horn held?

A. I suppose three or four ounces. It was impossible to give the animal the whole of it, full half was spilt. I conceived it to be very strong, and desired Mr. Snow would give her no more at that time, in order to try the strength of it. The horse dropped; he endeavoured to raise himself up, but could rise no farther than by setting himself upon his buttocks like a dog. I perceived he had entirely lost the use of his hinder parts. We then gave him another horn full, which in its turn knocked him down very soon, and at intervals we gave him several horns full to the amount of above a pint in the whole, and at the end of twenty-eight minutes he expired, violently convulsed, groaning, his tongue lolling out of his mouth; and indeed the first horse’s tongue had a very extraordinary appearance, for it darted backward and forward in the manner of a dart, but this horse lolled his tongue out like a dog when running. In both the horses the artery in the neck beat much, even after the animal had ceased to breathe, except we call the motion of the lower jaw, a kind of gasping, breathing. I saw all the bodies opened, and in all of them there was a violent distention of the veinous system, of the whole veins in the body, the stomach, bowels, lungs, and so on. The veins were distended and full of blood, the lungs appeared red and suffused. I said before that I did not use the term _inflammation_ in any other way than to convey the vulgar idea the appearance of red colour given to any part by blood. The lungs suffused with blood looking very red, and in the first horse it was of the colour of a deep pink; very different I conceive from the natural colour.

Q. You have smelled to the bottle which has the laurel water in it, do you know any smell in medicine that corresponds in smell with that mixture?

A. I do not know any medicine that smells like it.

Q. Does the smell described by Lady Boughton, something like bitter almonds, convey to you an idea of that mixture?

A. It does, and I have given the laurel water to many people to smell to, and they always described the smell to be something like bitter almonds. I do not exactly know how they expressed themselves, but they meant to say that.

Q. In your judgment is the quantity that one of these bottles contains of laurel water sufficient to take away life from any human creature?

A. In my opinion it is.

Q. I have now got your opinion upon the subject, independent of any appearances you observed upon the body of Sir Theodosius Boughton. Now are you from these appearances confirmed, or otherwise, in the opinion you have given?

A. Confirmed in it so far as upon viewing a body so long after the death of the subject one can be allowed to form a judgment upon such appearances.

_Dr. Rattray._ Cross-examined by Mr. Newnham.