The Express.
London, England, 1856-06-07 00:00:00

the pessibility of lie issoosses P Unhesitatingly we
mower that this I. sot the rule. The universally
recopied prissiple of all Maisel Jurispredeaco
that the peedoa of a roan's guilt or issoense• like
all other qesedoes lying oat of the domain of abio-
lute Beide% is to be made out by the prepoderatieg
Ukase of probable testimony; Ton are not to shrink
frees finding guilt merely Deems you cannot domes-
struts it like a truth is mathematics; you are sot
to deride in favour of innocence because you
cannot reduce the supposition of guilt into the
logical form of an ergeseesetnes ei siespoisseili. If
upon the whole body of the evidence, taken polka-
lively, there is room for a raseaseele sod probable
doubt, the prisons: is entitled to the benefit of it;
but he is only so entitled when rearm sad probability
are manifeedy on the side of moray. We are almost
ashamed to have to state propositions paerally
regarded is so elementary, and our only name for
doing se is, that the feeling so eztessively growing
up is certain quarters with regard to PALIMCS con.
victim', shows that however much these principles
may be admitted in theory, they are very apt to be
lint sight of in practice.

Now jest apply those admitted principles to
Paula's tams. The nisei of the *vides°, against
his may be broadly ranged ander two principal
heeds. I. The moral. 2. The scientific. As
the seed, or eireasistential branch of the @vides"
the most makes opponents of the propriety of the
eonviollea would probably admit that, taken by itself,
it suormosely preponderated against the primmer.
We need not again travel over ground with which
the general public are so familiar. Sella it to say,
that the following are a few of the points which the
prisoser's debut* left wholly antcsiehed :—No answer
was given to the charge that nixes had, within a
few days before Comes death, applied nearly 2,0001.
of Coors wtanings to satisfy the atlas of his own
mosey leaders; no account was given of the disposal
of the strychnine which PALM= was proved to have
purchased on the very eve of Coos's deaths no ex-
plaaation was gives of Pautiore strange espresso
to get the body pat into a coffin, of his demeanor at
the Fee mortals essamination, of his tempering with
the jars containing the matter about to be seat up to
Dr. TAYLOR for analysis, of his attempt to bribe the
poatboy, of his inquiries as to the possibility of
discovering drys:hob in the body, of his
exaltation on receiving a negative answer, of his
SSIMINNIS to smertaia the result of Dr. TAYLOR'S
report, and his subsequent endeavours to pervert
and misdirect the mind of the Coroner. Bat on thewl
and other similar points it is really 'mammary to
dwell. As far as the circumstantial *Aden's is eon-
earned, all those who by patient attendee to the
we have qualified themselves to form a judgment
must admit that, is its cumulative effect, it told with
overwhelming weight against any rational thess7 of
the primoor's innocence.
Posen' next to the scientific evideses, we find
that it is of three kinds: lat. The medical evidence
properly so milled, or that which deals with rymp.
tome; 2ndly. The dummies' evidence, or that which
deal, with the discovery and reproduction of poison
by certain haws thanks' tests; Srdly. The physiolo-
gical, or that whisk addresses itself to the question
whether stryohnis given is such quantities as to pro-
duce death can or can not be so far absorbed into the
system es to defy all the known resources of chemical
@sepia. Let as take these in their order. What
is the result of the evidence as to symptoms? Our
own view is, that when fairly weighed and eon&
dere, even apart from all reference to theme personal
asaampaaisaata of miner, demeanour, weight of
sharaeter, eossistesey of statement (all which, be it
remembered, are eireametasess to which juries
are bound to pay, and generally do pay, eon:palm
sad serious attentioa, sad at which no mere reader
of the evidence is soespetest to judge)—even when
thus regarded, we do set hesitate to say that the
medical *vide s.* es to symptoms most appear to
every compotest and impartial student of the ease
to be absolstely incompatible with any other view
than that floors death was maid by dryads.
The cheesiest evidesoss reuse at its highest, sereeele
to no IMO than this t that if any quantity of drya-
ds, however email, exists in that portion of the hu-
man tisanes submitted to the operations of • skilful
analyst, it may, by the appliestiou of proper tests, be
infallibly reproduced. Hat the chemical witnesses
did sot undertake to prosaism an opinion on the
physiological problem whether "triclinia an be so
taken as to eases death, and yet be afterwards so sub.
embsd is the system es sot to be reproducible by
shaded skill. They had of coarse no opinion to
give as to the mere matter of fact—whether is the
portion of smatter submitted to Dr. TAYLOR "braids
did exist or not. They did prosaism aa ojaaioa ou
the petit as to whether Dr. TAYLOR, evenfiltapposing
stryohnia to have been present, took the right che-
mical means of reproducing it, and that opinion was
unfavourable to Dr. TAYLOR'S analytical skill. But
what has all this to do with the question of PALIIIIIVa
guilt P The chemical evidence comae to this, and
this osly—that stryehnia, if taken by Coon, might
have bees absorbed or might not s that if not ab-
sorbed it would have been reproducible if proper
mew IMO tam to 141r01111110 it; that TAYLOR did
not take each 01141130, and thereto* that his failure
to reproduce it was no proof of its noa-existeses.
Last comes the physiological evidence—the principal
ground relied upon by those who seek to 'bow
that Prima's conviction was wrongfal, or at
all events that his we demands farther in-
vusigatitie. Now, to what does this widest*
mound It would be 'sough to say that it is
doubtfal—that it tells both ways—that it proves no-
thing more than the disagreement of doctors on one
of the most difficult and °Ware questions of physio-
logical edema The proposition to be decided is this:
Is it or is it not possible se to administer @brads as
that it shall produce death and yet leave no resides
over, or unabsorbed, in the system? The qualities
does not relate to the possibility of discovering
stryehaia what administered is large doses, bat to
the possibility of discovering it when administered in
dames nicely adjusted to the work of destrostioa as
to kill, and to do no more. The only eosolusios to
be drawn from a careful review of the evi-
demos adduced ea this point is that phy-
siological seisms is not yet sufficiently 'd-
eemed to give a derided snorer to this
question one way or (mother. Sebum, has not yet
bees able—will it ever be able P—to follow the opera-
tions et this mysterious spat is its destroyieg work.
How is it serried es, this strange alebesey of death—
that is the amuse of a few brief emends transmutes
the living body into the distorted sad edffesed corpse P
Can seise* trace the modes by which it is brought
into contact with the inmost sanctuaries of penes'
and moseales vitality P Can it explain step by step
the possess by whisk that half grain of issesent
looking powder, ea utterly innoxious to tooth and
sight, is sadden death if owe it bosoms admitted into
the systems through the organs of taste? And if mince
cannot pretend to explain this, can she volitive to
dogmatise, end that, too, fa the face of experiments
both ways, on the pomibillly se hapendbillty of
stryeknis absorption P What, than, is the result of
the whole me? Simply this. The circumstantial
widows, sad the medical evidences of symptoms, over-
whelnd•gly lead to the essolesion of guilt; the
shemisel widens* amounts to nothing either way
pbraologiaal 'Alms proves or thin, sad