24

IDENTITY OF SUBSTANCES.

also be removed, in order that, if necessary, they may be analyzed. If poison is not found in one of these parts, it is that it will be discovered in other parts of the body. It has b mended that a portion of earth immediately above and belov should be removed for analysis, as it may contain arsenic; but t to be an unnecessary piece of refinement when the coffin is enti the abdominal parietes still cover the viscera. If decomposition advanced as to have led to an admixture of earth with the v the poison is found in minute quantity in the tissues only, th the poison may be regarded as doubtful; and in this case th which the remains are found should undergo a chemical examin The body of a deceased person, when exhumed, should be id some friend or relative in the presence of the medical examiner. of murder by poison, the evidence almost failed, owing to this not having been taken.

It is important that the viscera taken from a body which has in the grave should be sealed up immediately. They shou allowed to come in contact with any metal, nor with any surf that of clean glass, porcelain, or wood. It has been recomme they should be washed with chlorinated lime or carbolic acid; decidedly improper; the use of any preservative chemical liq not only embarrass the future analysis, but would render a spec nation of an unused portion of the liquid necessary, the purity would have to be unequivocally established. Preservation fr clean glass vessels, with well-fitted corks covered with gutta-per is all that is required in practice.

Identity of Substances.-It is necessary to observe that all lega ties rigorously insist upon proof being adduced of the ident vomited matters and substances taken from the body of a deceas when poisoning is suspected. Supposing that, during the exa the stomach and viscera are removed from the body, they sho be placed on any surface or in any vessel until it has been first a that the surface or vessel is perfectly clean. [It is safer and n factory that all the vessels and apparatus used should be perfect well as clean.] If this point be not attended to, it will be in the counsel for the defence to raise a doubt in the minds of the jury the poisonous substance found might not have been accidentall in the vessel used. This may be regarded as a very remote pres but, nevertheless, it is upon technical objections of this kind that follow in spite of the strongest presumptions of guilt. This is a for which every medical witness should be prepared, whether he his evidence at a coroner's inquest or in a court of law. Many r disposed to regard matters of this kind as involving unnecessa and care; but if they are neglected it is possible that a trial n once stopped, so that the care bestowed upon a chemical analysi labor thrown away. Evidence of the presence of poison in the of a stomach was once rejected at a trial for murder, because they hastily thrown into a jar borrowed from a neighboring groce and it could not be satisfactorily proved that the jar was c entirely free from traces of poison (in which the grocer dealt) w for this purpose. When the life of a human being is at stak charge of murder by poisoning, the slightest doubt is always very interpreted in favor of the accused. [Prof R. Bridges reports which the search for arsenic in the body failed to detect that po where zinc in considerable quantities was found. It turned out or

PRESERVATION OF ARTICLES FOR ANALYSIS.

25

that the stomach, etc., had been carelessly thrown into an old tin can which had been formerly used for holding zinc paint before it had been sent to the analyst.]

Not only must clean vessels be used for receiving any article destined for subsequent analysis, but care must be taken that the identity of a substance is preserved, or the most correct analysis, afterwards made, will be inadmissible as evidence. The suspected substance, when once placed in the hands of a medical man, should never be let out of his sight or custody. It should be kept sealed under his private seal, and locked up, while in his possession, in a closet to which no other person has a key. If he has once let the article out of his hands, and allowed it to pass through the hands of several other persons, then he complicates the evidence for the prosecution, by rendering it indispensable for these persons to state under what circumstances it was placed while in their possession. The exposure of a suspected substance on a table or in a closet or room to which many have access, may be fatal to its identity; for the chemical evidence, so important in a criminal investigation, will probably be altogether rejected by the court. When any article (e. g. a stomach) is reserved for analysis, care should be taken to at once attach immovably to it, or to the vessel containing it, a label, upon which is plainly written the name of the deceased and the date of removal. This is especially necessary when there are two or more articles for analysis. The greatest inconvenience has resulted from the neglect of this simple precaution.

[A striking illustration of the importance of this rule is afforded by the case of State of Va. v. Mrs. E. E. Lloyd, charged with poisoning her daughter with arsenic. On the trial it transpired that the person who conveyed the article to the analyst had died. Although several grains of arsenic were said to have been detected, the identity of the stomach could Lot be positively established, and the court excluded the medical evidence for want of this single link in the chain of identity.]

Preserving articles for Analysis. In removing viscera or liquids from the body and reserving them for analysis, it is necessary to observe certain precautions. A clean vessel with a wide mouth should be selected; it should be only sufficiently large to hold the organ or liquid (the less air remaining in it the better); and it should be secured by a closely fitting cork, covered with gutta-percha tissue or bladder. Another piece of sheet caoutchouc or gutta-percha should then be tied over the mouth. In this way any loss by evaporation or decomposition is prevented, and the viscera may be preserved in a cool place for some time. If the mouth of the vessel be too wide for a cork, the other articles cannot be dispensed with. Paper only should not be used, as the appearances after death in the viscera may be entirely destroyed by the evaporation which takes place through the layers of paper with which the vessel containing them is covered. The practitioner should bear in mind that all these matters are sely to come out in evidence. For reasons already stated, antiseptic chemical compounds should not be used.

The articles used for the preservation of viscera should be in all cases scrupulously examined. Some kinds of calico are dressed with arsenic and starch paste, and many kinds of wrapping-paper as well as wall-papers are strongly impregnated with this poison. One observation shows that this is not an unnecessary caution. A medical man was engaged in examining the body of a child, in order to determine the cause of death. The organs were healthy, and as no sufficient cause presented itself, he removed the stomach with a view of making an analysis of its contents. He was suddenly called away; and, to preserve the stomach, he wrapped

it in a piece of paper (used for papering rooms), placing it on the u side, and he locked it in a closet until the following day. Assis friend, he then analyzed the contents, and found a trace of morph a pretty large quantity of arsenic. As the symptoms from w child had died were not those of poisoning with arsenic, and th no appearances of the action of this substance on the body, he can conclusion that its presence must have been owing to some ex cause. He examined a portion of the wall-paper in which the had been wrapped, and then found that that part of it which was yellow was tinted with sulphide of arsenic, or orpiment. It was evident, as commercial orpiment contains white arsenic, that the and its contents had imbibed a portion of the poison during th (Lancet, 1855, i. p. 632.) This satisfactorily accounted for the of arsenic, under circumstances which might have given rise t charge of murder. Many wall-papers contain arsenic, and this spreads by imbibition to other parts of the paper not so tinted. I of course, be proper to avoid in all cases the use of any wrapper upon it mineral colors of any description. The above case sh striking point of view the danger of trusting to chemical analys Unless we look to physiology and pathology, an erroneous opin be expressed.

The products of an analysis, in the shape of sublimates or pred should be preserved as evidence, distinctly labelled in small gla hermetically sealed. They can then, if asked for, be produced fo nation at the inquest or trial.

On the use of Notes.-As a rule in medico-legal investigations, cal practitioner should make notes of what he observes in regard t toms, appearances after death, and the results of analysis. E observations should be kept distinct from information given to others. He may base his conclusions on the former, but not on th until given in evidence. From the common forms of law in this a person charged with a crime may remain imprisoned, if at a from the metropolis, for some months before he is brought to tria obvious, however clear the circumstances may at the time appe practitioner, that it will require more than ordinary powers of me retain, for so long a period, a distinct recollection of all the fact case. If he is unprovided with notes, and his memory is defecti the case will turn in favor of the prisoner, who will be the pe benefit by the neglect of the witness. In adopting the plan here mended, such a result may be easily prevented. It may be remarl the law relative to the admissibility of notes or memoranda in evi very strict; and in trials for murder is rigorously enforced by the In order to render such notes or memoranda admissible, it is indisp necessary that they should have been taken on the spot at the t observations were made, or as soon afterwards as practicable; and it must be remembered that a witness can refer to them only for pose of refreshing his memory. If from indistinctness of writing o causes a copy of the notes has been subsequently made, a witness not destroy the original notes, but have them ready for production. [The rule of law governing a memorandum thus made, may be as follows:

A memorandum is admitted in evidence only for the purpose of s the existence of such facts or circumstances as it contains, and other purpose. And it is open to explanation to the same extent would be if the words had been spoken instead of being written.

MEDICO-LEGAL REPORTS.

27

A memorandum thus made in the usual course of business may be received in evidence, even though the witness is unable after its examination to state the particulars from recollection: Russell v. Hudson River R. R. Co., 17 N. Y. 134; Halsey v. Sinsebaugh, 15 N. Y. 485; Guy v. Mead, 22 N. Y. 462; Howard v. McDonough, 77 N. Y. 592; Mayor of N. Y. v. 2d Av. R. R., 102 N. Y. 572.

But the witness must be able to state that he once knew the facts contained in the memorandum to be true; that he made it at, or shortly after, the time they transpired, which he then intended to make correctly; and that he believes it to be correct; and he must also be able to verify the handwriting as his own, and the facts stated must be facts of his own knowledge and not on information derived from others: Haven v. Wendell, 11 N. H. 112; Sherr v. Wiley, 18 Pick. 558; Smith v. Johns, 3 Gray (Mass.), 517; Crittenden v. Rogers, 8 Gray, 452; Stickney v. Bronson, 5 Minn. 215; Marely v. Schultz, 29 N. Y. 346; Nicoll v. Webb, & Wheaton (U.S.), 326; Ocean Nat. Bk. v. Caryle, 9 Hun (N. Y.), 239.] He must also be prepared to give a reasonable explanation of any alterations or interlineations which may appear in his original notes. So in reference to all other written memoranda connected with the case, as, for example, the medicines prescribed for the deceased, the visits made to him, etc., the witness should be prepared to produce them and explain any remarks which may be found in his books. Counsel are entitled to look at and examine all documents of this kind which are produced or used by the witness in giving his evidence in the courts.

Medico-legal Reports.-One of the duties of a medical jurist is to draw up a report of the results of his examination : 1, in regard to symptoms; 2, in regard to appearances after death; and 3, in regard to the results of an analysis. With respect to the first two divisions of the report, the reader is referred to the rules for investigating cases of poisoning (pp. 0, 0, 0). It need hardly be observed that the time at which the person was first seen, and the circumstances under which the attendance of the practitioner was first required, as well as the time of death, should be particularly stated. The hour, the day of the week, and the month, should be invariably mentioned. Some medical witnesses merely state the day of the week, without that of the month, or vice versâ. At a trial this sometimes creates great confusion, by rendering a reference to an almanac necessary. The words yesterday, next day, etc., should never be used. The facts which it will be necessary to enter in the report are specially stated under the heads of investigation (see pp.21-2). If these facts are not observed in the order there set down, their value as evidence of the cause of death, or of the criminality or innocence of particular persons, will be lost

In drawing up a report of symptoms and appearances after death, the facts should be first plainly and concisely stated seriatim, in language easily intelligible to non-professional men. A reporter is not called upon to di-play his erudition, but to make himself understood. If technical terms are employed, their meaning should also be stated. When a subject is thoroughly understood, there can be no difficulty in rendering it in simple language; and when it is not well understood, the practitioner is not in a position to make any report. Magistrates, coroners, and barristers easily detect ignorance, even when it appears under the mask of erudition. In recording facts the reporter should not encumber his statements with opinions, inferences, or comments. The facts should be first stated and the conclusion should be reserved until the end of the report. The language in which conclusions are expressed, should be precise and clear. It

28

MEDICO-LEGAL REPORTS-CHEMICAL ANALYSIS.

must be remembered that these are intended to form a concise s of the whole report, upon which the judgment of a magistrate decision of a coroner's jury, will be ultimately based. They sh most strictly confined to the matters which are the subject of inqu which have actually fallen under the observation of the witness. they commonly refer to the following questions:-What was the death? What are the medical circumstances which lead you to that death was caused by violence? What are the circumstance lead you to suppose that death was not caused by natural Answers to one or all of these questions comprise, in general, all reporter is required to introduce into the conclusions of his report The reporter should remember that his conclusions are to be bas upon medical facts,-not upon moral circumstances, unless he is s required to express his opinion with regard to them. Further, th be founded only on what he has himself seen or observed. Any tion derived from others, should not be made the basis of an either in evidence or in a medico-legal report. It is scarcely nece remark that a conclusion based upon mere probabilities is of no evidence.

In drawing up a report on the results of a chemical analy following points should be borne in mind. A liquid or solid is for analysis. 1. When, from whom, and how received? 2. I state was it received-secured in any way, or exposed? 3. If m one substance received, was each separately and distinctly labelled appearance of the vessel, its capacity, and the quantity of liqu measure) or solid (by weight) contained therein, noted. 4. I characters of the substance. 5. As to processes and tests emplo determining whether it contained poison. These processes need described; a general outline of the analysis will suffice. 6. Su the substance to contain poison-was this in a pure state or mix some other substance? 7. The strength of the poison, if an acid, be in solution: in all cases, the quantity of poison found. 8. Su no poison to be contained in it, what was the nature of the sub Did it contain anything of a noxious nature, i. e., likely to injure or destroy life? 9. Could the supposed poisonous substanc naturally or be produced within the body? 10. Was it present in the liquids or solids employed in the chemical analysis? 11. Was tained in any of the articles of food or medicine taken by the de 12. Is its presence to be ascribed to the use of any mineral mat ployed by injection after death for the preservation of the body deceased? 13. What quantity of poison was actually separated free or absorbed state? 14. How much of the substance found under the circumstances, be likely to destroy life? There are few in which answers to some of these questions, although not forma will not be required; and unless they are borne in mind by the o at the time an analysis is undertaken, those which are omitted ca receive an answer, however important to the ends of justice that may ultimately become.

There are frequently defects in these reports which it is desi point out. The statements are sometimes drawn up in exag language; at others they are overloaded with technical, and there intelligible terms, and the writer is not careful enough to keep distinct from his comments. The former may be useful as eviden latter are inadmissible. With respect to the first of these defec too much the practice of medical men, in drawing up reports of