The Sun.
London, England, 1847-03-02 00:00:00

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, March 1.

(Sittings before the LORD CHIEF BARON and Special Juries).
The Court was occupied during nearly the whole of the
day in hearing a crtse arising out of a wood paving company,

the particulars cf which did not however furnish any feature
of public importance.
At the conclusion of the case the Court adjourned until
Easter term.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Mardi I.
This being the last day of the London sittings, the Court
was engaged with common jury cases of no interest but to
the parties concerned.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
OLD COURT.
The 161st sessions of this Court, and fifth during the pre-
sent Mayoralty, were opened yesterday morning in presence of
the Right Hon. the Lord Mayor, Sir Chapman Marshall,
Alderman Hughes, and Sheriffs Challis and Kennard, and the
Learned Recorder of the City of London.
From the short time which had elapsed since the last
sessions, the calendar was necessarily light; it contained the
names of no more than 101 persons committed to take their
trial on the present occasion, but some of these for crimes
of rather grave character.
The RecenwEit, when the grand jury had been chosen and
sworn in, proceeded as usual to deliver his charge. He sari
the calendar contained a list of persons amounting to 1114;
but he was given to understand that that number had been
already greatly augmented by commitments on Saturday
la-t, and he believed it vety probable that a considerable
addition would be made to that number in the course of their
attendance there. There were a number of the cases cem-
mitted for trial which were of grave importance and
serious aspect, but in general they were simple
in the facts, and it (lid not appear to him after reading ov, r
the depositions that they were at all likely to involve arty
questions of law. But if contrary to his expectation. suit
difficultiet should arise, the Court, as usual, would readily
furnish the grand jury with the assistance which the cir-
cumstances mip lit appear to require; yet considering the de-
positions which had been submit (!il to him, wi( 1, one excep-
tion, he did not think the cases called for any lengthened ob-
servations on his part. There were such crimes in the c :lender
as rutting and wounding, using violence towards children
under ten years of age. and other offences of like serious
nature; but still the question whether these cases ought to
he submitted to further investigation depended upon the
evidence, whether that was such as to support the charge;
and in exercising their judgment on that they would merely
have to consider whether the evidence was left unanswered
and unexplained, for in that case they would have to send it
for further inquiry before the petit jury. But, on the other
hand, if the case on the part of the prosecutor did not
warrant them in giving the evidence their credit;
if it betrayed any sinister motive on the part of
the person promoting the charge, it became the
duty of the grand jury to sheltet the person committed
from further proceedings on that charge. There was, how-
ever, one case • on which he felt it his duty to make a few
remarks, because it was a case a little out of the ordinary
character, and one where, though the facts were of the
clearest description, some considerations perhaps beyond
them were involved. It was not his duty to say what was
the proper effect of the evidence which appeared on the de-
positions, but it might be necessary to lay before them such
observations as he thought might enable them to come to
the conclusion whether they ought to send the case for
fnrther inquiry. He alluded to the charge of manslaughter
in the administering of medicine. Now that was a case in
which a distinction had been laid down in law, that if a
physician or surgeon should in the proper discharge of his
vocation administer medicines or potions, and death should
fellow, that that was not manslaughter or murder, but a
misadventure. But he felt it necessary to observe another
distinction which had been taken in cases of this nature, viz.,
between a licensed member of the profession, a rsTular
phv-
sician or surgeon, and a person not in possemen of this
token. Several haul attempted le dam this distinction, but
authorities in law questioned the propriety of it, and Mr.
Justice lilackstene concurred in doing so, and it was laid
down, that, unless the person in charge of the patient showed
gross ignorance, or a criminal disregard of human life, he was
not to be charged in criminal law. The question, therefore,
they would have to consider in the present case would be,
whether the party charged with misconduct had, in that
misconduct, showed a gross and culpable ignorance of the
medicines pre:cribed, er the case dealt with, or whether he
exhibited a criminal disregard of human life. The Recorder
here read from the books in confirmation of his opinion, and
quoted tire case of Mr. Long, whom the jury, after
consideration of the evidence, found guilty of a cri-
minal disregard of human lire. Now, in the
present case the circumstances were peculiar. Ordinarily
speaking,, the act done was immediately traceable to the party
cheesed, and then it became a simple question whether
he was either innocent or guilty—whether the potion adini •
nistered was dangerous which had ended in death. In the
present case a prescription had been written out and given to
the patient ; the nature of the indieposition for which a re-
randy was sonelit did not appear definitely on the face of the
depositions, and that, he believed, was not necessary. Here
a prescription was given for medicines, partly pills, partly
liquids, wilds were to consist of certain ingredients, and
when made up to be taken in certain proportions. It ap-
peared that the first lime that prescription had been made
up under the superintendence of the party charged with the
offence on his own premises, and by his own officials, and
that it had been taken by the patient wthout any
bad consequences. But the second time the pre-
scription had been made up by a third party,
by as ordinary chemist, and the effect proved fatal. Now,
they would have to consider whether the ingredients in the
potion were of an injurious nature, whether they were calcu-
lated when mixed to destroy lite. whether there was any
appearance of gross ignorance in making out such a prescrip-
tion, or any criminal disregard of human life in leaving either
the terms of the prescription so vague and ill defined that in
the hands of a third person ill consequences would arise, or
in leaving a prescription of such a kind to the ill chances
which might arise from a is pographical error on its being
made up by an ordinary chemist. The prescription in this
case was the compound spirit of ammonia 2 drachms, the
tincture of opium 16 drops, prussic acid of Scheele's strength
4 drops, compound strychnia powder 2 grains, and
bitter almond water 6 ounces; a spoonful and a fish
to be taken three times a day. As he had intimated
before, this precription having been made up, exclusive of the
strychnia powder, was ad:ninister• d i r the quantity pre-
scrilsed to the patient, a young lady. After taking it she
walked a short distance, then fell, became immediately in-
sensible, and almost immediately died. As they would gather
from what he had said, one of the ingredients had not been
included in the draught administered. If that ingredient,
being incLided, would have had the effect of neutralising all
poisonous qualities in the medicine, then nothing could be
alleged against the party charged for having prescribed me-
dicines of a dangerous character. But, again, if any, or all
the other ingredients were poisonous, and this one being
poisonous also only added to the general effect, their conclu-
' eion must be different, and the person prescribing responsible
for his prescriptions. It was worthy of remark, that there
were two articles mentioned in that prescription, namely.
compound strychnia powder, 2 grs., and bitter almond
water 6 ounces. These were not to be found in
any former Pharmacopceia; and any ordinary chemist,
called on to make up the prescription, would be ignorant of
the effect it might have upon the patient. This must be ob-
served, that the last of the ingredients, almond water, con-
tained in it a poison which was extremely dangerous in it-
self, and the quantity infused into the water differed much in
degree, and contained proportions of prussic acid which
were never known to be applied internally. That, then,
inferred danger ; but it was connected with others
for their were other ingredients, viz., prussic acid of Scheele's
strength, 4 drops; the tincture of opium, 16 drops; strychnia
powder, 2 grains—all added to the bitter almond-water.
The jury would have to inquire what was strychnia powder.
Ile might tell them what it was, but he would not presume
to submit his opinion, as they would have medical gentle
men before them from whom it would be the duty of the
grand jury distinctly to ascertain the nature of that
ingredient, and the effect which it would produce on the
whole mixture, whether or not it would neutralize the (alters.
They were then to ascertain whether any evil Meets had
followed from the omission of that ingredient ; haying ascer-
tained that, they would inquire whether the death occurring
in thiS case could be traced to the prescription. Haying ascer-
tained these questions, and satisfied themselves upon it,
they would inquire whether this prescription had been issued
with an injunction that it might be made up by an ordie
nary chemist, and thereby showed a rash disregard of
human lite, as Lord Lyndhurst had ruled, when he
said " I leave it to the jury to say whether death has
been occasioned or accelerated by this medicine ; and
second, I tell the jury that the prisoner is guilty of
manslaughter if he has acted in gross ignorance, or exhibited
a rash and criminal disregard of human life. The Learned
Recorder, aftercommenting at more length on the parti-
culars which he had just laid down, dismissed the grand jury-
to the discharge of their important dirties.
The morning was mostly occupied with swearing in the
petit jury.