The Press.
London, England, 1856-05-24 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

turned inwards. I put a bottle of hot water to her feet,
but that did not relax them. Shortly before She died she
said sbe felt easier. The last words she uttered were—
" Turn me over." We did turn ber over on the floor.
She died a very few minutes after she had spoken those
words. She died very quietly. She was quite conscious,
and knew me during the whole time. About an hour and
a quarter elapsed from the time I gave her the medicine
till she died.

Witness further stated that the paroxysms were
continually recurring, and that the deceased remained
stiff all the time until within a few minutes of her
death.
Mr. Francis Taylor attended Mrs. Smith :

I was summoned to her house one morning soon after
three, and when I arrived I found her dead. The body
was on the floor near the bed. The hands were very much
bent. The feet were contracted and turned inwards. The
soles of the feet were hollowed up, and the toes contracted,
apparently from recent spasmodic action. The inner edge
of each foot was tinned up. There was a remarkable
rigidity about the limbs.
By Lord CAMPBELL: The body was warm.
Examination continued : The eyelids were almost ad-
herent to the eyeballs. The druggist who made up the
prescription was named Jones. I made a post-mortem
examination three days after the death. The contraction
of the feet continued, but it had gone off somewhat from
the rest of the body. I found no trace of disease in the
body. The heart was contracted and perfectly empty, as
were all the large arteries leading from it. I analysed the
medicines she had taken with another medical man, It
contained a large quantity of strychnine. It originally
contained nine grains, and she had taken one third—three
grains. I made a very casual examination of the stomach
and bowels, as we had plenty of proof that poison had been
taken without making use of tests. The ancles were tied
by a bandage to keep them together.

Mr. Morley, surgeon, detailed thef symptoms of a
lady supposed to have been recently poisoned
strychnine. No name was mentioned, but the case
was readily recognisable as that of Mrs. Dove. The
symptoms were similar to those described as ex-
perienced by Cook. Upon the post-mortem ex-
amination strychnine was discovered in the sto-
mach, and administered, atter separation by che-
mical analysis, t, rabbits, mice, and a guinea-pig.
The symptoms experienced by these animals were
more or less characteristic of strychnine—namely,
general uneasiness, difficult breathing, convulsions of
a tetanic kind, muscular rigidity, arching backwards
of the head and neck, violent stretching cut of the
legs, and death. In reply to the question as to
how strychnine acted, Mr. Morley said that he
thought it acted upon the nerves, but a part might
I,e taken into the blood and act through the blood.
That which was absorbed would destroy life, but be
believed that a part might be absorbed and a
part remain in the stomach unchanged.
Mr. Edward Moore stated the case of a Mr.
Clutterbuck, suffering in 1848 from paralysis, and
taking strychnine as a remedy. On one occasion he
took an overdose, and suffered similar symptoms to
Cook, for three hours. He desired to be " turned
over " and rubbed, was stiff in every limb, and
snapped at the spoon when a sedative was adminis-
tered. He survived the attack.

As the next witness was Dr. Taylor, whose
examination would be lengthened, the court rose.

3IONDAY.

The examination of Dr. Alfred Swaine Taylor was
proceeded with. Dr. Taylor stated the nature of the
operation of strychnine to be immediate absorption
into the blood, then circulation through the body, and
action upon the spinal cord. With animals poisoned by
strychnine there was first a quivering muscular mo-
tion, arising from the poison producing violent and
involuntary contraction, then a sudden paroxysm,
fore and hind legs stretched cut, head and tail drawn
hack and bowed, jaws spasmodically closed, eyes
prominent, after a short time a remission of the
symptoms, but the slightest noise or touch repro-
duced another convulsive paroxysm, and under a
succession of such flts the animal died, in times
varying from thirteen to twenty-three minutes.
From the description given of Cook's attacks, the
symptoms and appearances were the same as those
he observed in animals to which he had administered
strychnine ; but in his analysis of Cook's intestines
he failed to discover traces of any poison but
antimony. Strychnia, when given in small doses,
became absorbed into the blood, and was not dis-
coverable in the stomach. A small quantity could
not be discovered, but with a large dose there was a
retention of that in excess of the quantity required
for the destruction of life. Dr. Taylor further
stated that the conduct of the analysis in Cook's
case took place under the most unfavorable circum-
stances, from the stomach and intestines having
been cut through and mixed together. He thought
Cook's symptoms precisely similar to those of Mrs.
Smith, Agnes French, and others, and he knew no
cause within the range of human disease to which he
could refer Cook's symptoms except to strychnine.
Dr. Taylor was then subjected to a most searching
and severe cross-examination by Mr. Sergeant SHEE,
with the view to prove to the court that Dr. Taylor
had at first expressed an opinion that Cook had died

0 •

from the effects of antimony. A letter from Dr;
Taylor to Mr. Gardner, dated December 4th, was
read, in which Dr. Taylor stated that he and Dr.
Rees, having found no traces of strychnine, prus:ie
acid, or opium, in conducting Cook's analysis, and
having found traces of antimony, were of opinion
that Cook had died of the effects of antimony.
Dr. Taylor distinctly reiterated the statement that.
from the traces discovered in Cook's body, he was
justified in saying that Cook had diedfrom antimony.
The witness was then questioned concerning a cer-
tain letter he had written to the Lancet, and in
which he had said, relative to Cook's and Mr.
Palmer's case :

The mode in which they will affect the person accused
is of minor importance compared with their probable ir,-
fluence on society. I have no hesitation in saying th. t
the future security of life in this country will mainly de-
pend on the judge, the jury, and the counsel who may ha% e
to dispose of the charges of murder which have arisen out
of these investigations.

He admitted having written the letter, and thought
he was justified as a medical man in publish-
ing that letter before the trial of the accused.
Dr. Taylor was also examined with reference to
a certain statement which appeared in the Illustrated
Times, shortly after the analysis in Cook's case.
Dr. Taylor characterised the publication of that
article in the Illustrated Times as the greatest and
most discraceful deception ever practised upon a
medical man. Inforination had been extracted from
him under cover of a letter of introduction from
Professor Faraday. He had remonstrated with Mr.
Mayhew and objected to the publication, but could
not prevent it. He bad never used any such ex-
pression as that " Palmer should have strychnia
enough before he had done with him." In answer to
further questions, Dr. Taylor stated that he knew no
case of poisoning by strychnia in which the patient
screamed before he was seized, nor spoke freely
after the paroxysms had commenced ; neither could
he mention any case in which there was a repetition
of the paroxysms after so long an interval as from
Monday to Tuesday night, which occurred in Cook's
case.

Dr. Rees corroborated Dr. Taylor's evidence as to
the discovery of antimony and their failure to find
strychnia in Ca k's analyses.
Professor Brande was present at one analysis in
Cook's case. The deposit discovered he could posi-
tively state was antimony.
Professor Christison was of opinion that strychnis
administered in the form of a pill would be retarded
in its operation, especially if mixed with any of those
resinous materials used by medical men for the
purpose of making ordinary pills. Absorption in
such a case would not commence until the pill was
broken down by the process of digestion. From the
evidence he had beard of Cook's symptoms he could
conclude that they were attributable only to strych-
nia or four poisons containing it.
The trial was then adjourned.
TUESDAY.

The examination of witnesses was resumed. The first
two witnesses (Daniel Burgen and John Espin) ex-
amined this day were connected with sealing up Pal-
mer's papers after his arrest upon the verdict of the
coroner's jury in Cook's case. Neither of them, in
examining the papers, had discovered any cheque on
Messrs. Wetherby purporting to bear the signature
of Cook, nor any similar paper to that mentioned by
Cheshire, the Rugeley postmaster, as having been
offered to him for attestation by Palmer.
Dr. Bamford was then examined, and deposed to
having prepared morphine pills for Cook on Satur-
day, Sunday, and Monday. He never saw Cook take
the pills. Early on Tuesday morning he met Palmer,
who requested him not to disturb Cook. Between
twelve and one p.m., as he was again going to see
Cook, he met Palmer, who begged him &second time
not to disturb Cook. At seven p.m. he saw Cook
before Jones and Palmer :

Palmer said he rather wished Cook to have his pills
again, and that he would walk up with me for them. He
did so, and stood by while I prepared them in my surgery.
I had strychnia in a cupboard in my own private room. I
put the pills in a box, and addressed it, " Night pills.
John Parsons Cook, Esq " I wrote that direction on all
the four nights. On the Tuesday night Palmer requested
that I would put on a direction. After that I did not again
see Cook alive. Palmer took away the pills between seven
and eight o'clock. I had wrapped the box up in papery
and had sealed it.
Mr. Pratt, solicitor, of Queen-street, May-fair, was
then examined, and detailed at length the various
transactions he had carried on with Palmer. The
witness produced bills to the amount
on 28th November, 1850. He

in August, at Palmer's request,
due December 2, for Cook, with

and a wine warrant for 651., taking
Polestar and Sirius as security.
cash to Palmer in the same 1
transaction. lie deposed also
ment of 3001. on th,e 10th of
the 19th, 450/. through Mr.
by clugue frp* 14. Esher

nount of 12,5001. du,
acknowledged having
cashed a bill of 5001,,
th a cheque for 37bi,
king a bill of sale owl
ty. He sent 3001. in
letter on a separate
io to Palmer's pay-
' November, bOL on
Herring, and .120#,
911 P 4iie

490 THE PRESS. SATURDAY,

Witness read numerous letters from Palmer re-
Wing to his embarrassed position, and one on
Nov. 21 announcing Cook's death, and desiring
witness not to mention what moneys Cook had ever
received from him, and a more pressing letter on
the same subject on Nov. 20.
Mr. Armstrong, a Hugeley attorney, proved receiving
from Palmer on Nov. 20 two 501. notes in payment
of a debt and costs. _ _

John Spillbury, a Rugeley farmer, proved having
received from Palmer, on Nov. 22, a 501. Bank of
England note in payment of 461. 2s.
William Cheshire proved that the cheque for 3751.
sent by Cook to Pratt was paid into the Rugeley Pro-
vincial Bank to Palmer's account.
The court then adjourned.
WEDNESDAY.

The court was more crowded on this day, when
the prosecution closed and the defence commenced,
than on any previous occasion. Every available seat
was occupied, every passage crowded, and the most
intense interest manifested in the proceedings.
Shortly after ten a.m. the judges entered, and the
prisoner was immediately placed at the bar. He
listened with great attention to the address of his
learned counsel, and maintained the same calmness
and self possession he has exhibited throughout the
whole proceedings. The last witnesses for the
prosecution, Mr. Charles Weatherby and Mr. Butler,
were called. The first simply deposed to having re-
ceived from Palmer on 21st November a cheque
signed by Cook for 3501., and on 24th November a
notice from Palmer not to pay away any money he
might have in hand on account of Cook. Mr.
Butler was owed 7001. by Palmer for racing transac•
tioas at Liverpool, 1855 ; could not get the money
from him until Shrewsbury races, when Palmer paid
him 401. and 2101. he won for Palmer and kept on
account.

struction of Cook, he thought that the evidence
clearly showed that not only was it not the interest of
Palmer to destroy Cook, but that the death of Cook
was the very worst calamity that could possibly
happen to Palmer. Cook was a gentleman of sup-
posed fortune, and had frequently been proposed by
Palmer as security for borrowed money. The infer-
ence to be drawn from the letters of Palmer to Pratt,
and particularly from a letter of Cook to Fisher of
November the 16th, in which Cook said :
Tt is of very great importance, both to Mr. Palmer and
myself, that a sum of 5001. should be paid to a Mr. Pratt,
of 5, William-street, May-fair, to-morrow without fail.
3001. has been sent up to night; and if you will be kind
enough to pay the other 2001. to-morrow, you will greatly
oblige me ; and I will give it to you on Monday at. Tat-
tersall's—

the theory of the Crown ? That Palmer was eo in debt
that be could settle his transactions better with Stevens,
the executor, than with Cook, his friend. It was manifestly'
the interest of Palmer that Cook should live. The interest
of Palmer that he should live? Was it safe for Palmer
that he should die ?

The learned sergeant then alluded to the point of
the 13,0001. insurance upon the life of Walter
Palmer, and contended that the doubts raised by
the insurance company against Palmer were of a
nature to destroy his character and bring upon his
head the suspicion of murder. Would it not, then,
have been clear to a keen man of the world like
Palmer that those suspicions arising in October
would have crushed him with irresistible momentum
if rumour arose of another violent death in Novem-
ber, and that every chance—(and in the opinion of
the highest legal authorities his claim was incon-
testable)—of his ever obtaining by law the 13,0001.
insurance would be destroyed it' any foul play caused
Cook's death? It was clear that Palmer bad no
interest in Cook's death, but a direct pecuniary in-
terest in his living.
Then as to the medical evidence of the case.
The appearance of the body was such as might have
been expected from the licentious life Cook was
known to have led. When his body was opened
the second time granules were discovered upon the
arachnoid membrane which authoritative medical
witnesses would state they regarded as conclusive
explanation of the cause of death. Dr. Taylor
first stated that death ensued from antimony, and
then declared on oath that he believed Cook was
poisoned by strychnine, although he had failed, on
his own showing, to discover the faintest trace
of strychnine, and, argued the learned sergeant, " if
verdicts are to be moulded upon such testimony as
this, life will be no longer secure." With respect to
the immediate cause of Cook's death, it was not for
him to explain. The Crown assumed that death
arose from tetanic convulsions produced by strych-
nine; but there was no proof in the first place
that the disease was tetanus, or only that tetanus
produced by poison. The highest medical authority
proved that men were often struck down by convul-
sions that left no trace of their origin. The learned
sergeant then reviewed the whole of the symptoms
experienced by Cook during his last illness, and
denied that his death could have resulted from strych-
nine on the following grounds :—First, that no case
could be found in which, while the paroxysms lasted,
the patient had so much command over the muscles
of animal life and voluntary motion as Mr. Cook had
upon Monday and Tuesday night; secondly, that
there was no authentic case of tetanus from strychnine
in which the paroxysm was delayed so long after the
ingestion of the poison as it was in Cook's case;
thirdly, that there was no case in which the recovery
from a paroxysm of strychnine poison bad been so
rapid as it was in Cook's case upon Monday night,
or in which a patient had endured so long an interval
of repose or exemption frem its symptoms after-
wards. And as to the evidence of the post-mortem
examination, he would bring Dr. Letheby, and
other medical gentlemen, who should distinctly
prove that, in cases of death from strychnine,
the heart on examination is invariably found full.
Then, with respect to the evidence of Elizabeth
Mills, produced by the Crown. He was reluctant to
impute perjury to her, but her statements before the
coroner and in that court materially varied :
The truth is (said the learned Sergeant) we know
perfectly well that if a considerable interval of time
occurs between the first story and the second story,
and if the intelligent and respectable persons who are
anxious to investigate the truth, but who still have a
strung moral conviction—upon imperfect information—
of the guilt of an accused person, will talk to witnesses
and say, " Was there anything of this kind ?" or " anything
of that kind ? " the witnesses at last catch hold of the
phrase or term which has been so often used to them, and
having in that way adopted it, they fancy that they may
tell it in court. 'Tit might have been the case with
Elizabeth Mills; and let me point out to you what occurs
to me to be the right opinion that you should form of that
witness. I submit to you that in this case of life and
death—or, indeed, in any case involving a question of real
importance to liberty or to property—that young woman's
evidence would not be relied on ln
her evidence before the coroner she was asked whethtr
she had tasted the broth ? She said she had, and she
thought it very good. She did not then say a word about
any ill effects the broth had produced ; but she has sip ce
learnt that it is part of the case of those out of whose hat ds
the Crown has taken the prosecution, and that it is the
theory of Dr. Taylor that all this retching and vomiting whs
the result of a ccnstant dosing with antimonial poison. She
has probably been frequently asked whether she was not
sick after drinking the broth ; perhaps she may have been
sick on some Sunday or another, and she has persi.aded
herself--for I do not wish to impute perjury to her—that
she was made sick by the two table-spoonfuls of broth
which she drank Is it not to the last degree incredib'e
that a shrewd, intelligent man like Palmer should have eN•
posed himself to such a chance of detection as sending
broth which he had poisoned from his house, to stand by
the kitchen fire of the Talbot Arms, when, sure as fate, the
cook would taste it ? Did you ever know a cook who would
not taste broth sent by another person and said to be pat•
ticularly good ? It is not in the nature of things. A
cook is a taster, she tastes everything, and Palmer most

Was that Cook at that data was of immense use to
Palmer; and whatever construction might be put on
Cook's words, it was clear that Cook and Palmer
were fast friends, playing into each other's hands, and
that Cook was not only aware of Palmer's embar-
rassments, but was willing to relieve him. Con-
cerning Palmer's visit to London on the Monday
previous to Cook's death, it had not been shown
that Cook was in any way surprised at not hearing
from Fisher on Tuesday relative to the settlement
of his claims at Tattersall's for Shrewsbury races,
as he knew that Palmer did not intend to go to this
regular agent, Fisher, because Palmer in that case
would have had to pay Fisher the 2001. out of
the Shrewsbury winnings, advanced to Pratt ac-
cording to Cook's request on Nov. 16 ; and as
it was the interest of both that Palmer should
be relieved from the pressure of Pratt, it was
clearly a vital point to get as much money
together as possible by employing Herring to
make Cook's Shrewsbury settlement at Tattersall's.
And did not the death of Cook bring ruin upon Pal
mer ? The 5001. bill of Cook, due on the 2nd of
December, by Pratt's own words was saddled upon
Palmer. " The death of Mr. Cook," wrote Pratt on
Nov. 22nd, " will now compel you to look about as to
the p.tyment of the bill for 5001." Now with refe
rence to this 5001. transaction, which the Attorney.
General bad offered as an evidence of Palmer's want
of means—so great that he had forged Cook's name
to the back of the bill, and pocketed the 3751. in cash
and the 651. wine warrant—a view not borne out
by fact Cook at the time of this transaction,
in August, was as much in want of money as Pal-
mer. Palmer wrote to Pratt, as Pratt had shown,
inclosing the 5001. bill, and asking Pratt to do the
bill for Cook. Pratt declined, except on a
bill of sale on Polestar and Sirius. Cook executed
the bill of sale ; and he would ask was it credible
that, after executing a bill of sale on his two best
horses, he would remain silent for three months
without the money (which he did) if Palmer misap-
propriated the cheque and the wine warrant? Pratt,
in his letter inclosing Cook's cheque and wine war-
rant according to Palmer's request, sent Palmer 315/.
in cash. Now, in Palmer's banking account at
Rugeley 3751. appeared paid in to his account, but
there was no mention of the 3151., and the fair in-
ference he drew from this transaction was that Cook,
as proved by Palmer's letter to Pratt Sept. 9th,
in want of ready money, took Palmer's cash,
giving Palmer the cheque, and the authority to put
his (Cook's) name at the back of it; or else how
could Cook's silence for three months, the Rugeley
Bank return, and Palmer becoming liable for the bill
on Cook's death, be accounted for? Again, Cook on the
day of his death gave Palmer a cheque on Messrs.
Weatherby for 3501., for stakes won at Shrewsbury.
If intelligence had been received that night of Cook's
death, Messrs. Weatherby would have refused to pay
the money; and was it probable that Palmer in his
position would, under these circumstances, have
destroyed Cook that night? As it happened, not
having received the stakes from the clerk of the
Shrewsbury course, Messrs. Weatherby could not
cash the cheque. It was asserted that, having ob-
tained the cheque fraudulently, he had determined
upon destroying Cook for fear of discovery. But was
that a means likely to answer his purpose? If Pal-
mer put Cook to death he immediately became solely
liable for the one bill of 5001. for three of 2001. held
by Herring, and was security for the bill of sale exe-
cuted on Sirius and Polestar. The effect of Cook's
death was to increase Palmer's liabilities, and de-
prive him of the assistance of a friend, for Cook being
dead there was no one to save Palmer from ruin. In
all the evidence produced there was not a trace that
any one else in the world but Cook existed who
would lend Palmer his name or assist him with
money :

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL then intimated that the
case lor the prosecution wai closed.

Again, was not the fact that Palmer forged, if he did
forge, the name of his mother, was not that fact conclusive
that he had no other resources ? Was that not evidence
that he had no other resources than the good nature or the
folly of Cook? Wu it not cer•ain that Palmer, in the
event of his owing Cook money, would fare far worse after
Cook's death with Cook's executors and their impassible
attorneys, having a plain duty perform, to ascertain and
procure as far as might be the rights of their clients estab-
lished in due course of law ? How then could Palmer
have an interest in the death of Cook? And yet what was