The Sun.
London, England, 1856-05-27 00:00:00

THE RUGELEY POISONINGS.

TRIAL OF WILLIAA PALMER.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT (THIS DAY).

TWELFTH DAY.

The Court opened this morning -at 10 o'clock. The
same intense inter ,st was manifest both within and
without the court as on yesterday as to the result of the
trial. By 9 o'clock that portion of the court appro-
priated to the public was densely crowded, and there
were several gentlemen and noblemen on the bench at
that early hour.
The jury entered the court shortly before 10 o'clock,
and on their Lordships' arrival the prisoner was placed
in the dock. His appearance is much the same as it
was at the commencement of the trial. There is, how-
ever, a slight shade of sadness in his expression, but no
traces of that anxiety and deep mental suffering to be
expected in a man charged with such a dreadful crime
and with his life in such imminent danger. During the
continuance of the summing up to-day, notwith-
standing the strong remarks of Lord Campbell
with reference to the damaging points of evidence
against the prisoner, he presented that coolness and
indifference he has all along exhibited in a most re-
markable and extraordinary manner. He repeatedly
took notes of the summing up, with the deliberate and
systematic manner of a person ordinarily interested in
the case, and when any particular point struck him he
communicated it in writing to his counsel. It was done
in a quiet easy manner, devoideif all kind of display, and
not with the intention of attracting the notice of the
public.
The jury having been called over and answered to their
names,
Lord Campbell, who was again very inaudible, said—
Gentlemen of the Jury, —At the adjournment of the
Court last evenin! I finishedethe task of laying before
you all the evidence on the part of the prosecution, and
certainly it does present a serious case against the pri-
soner, if unanswered. It appears that in the middle of
November the prisoner was involved in pecuniary diEfie
culties of the most formidable nature. H 3 had engage.
ments to perform which he was unable to meet without
the most extraordinary exertions. He had to make pay-
ments for which he was unprepared, and an action had
been brought against him and his mother on a forged
bill of exchange. He had no credit, and he had no pro-
perty on which money could be raised. It so happened
that on the 13th of November the deceased became pos-
sessed of 1,0001. by the winning of his horse Polestar,
and there is evidence from which the inference may be
drawn that the prisoner framed the design of appro-
priating his money to his own use. He took means to
accomplish that object, for you will find that he appro-
priated his money to the payment of debts of which he
;Ilene was liable. There is also evidence frOm which it
may be inferred that he drew a check in the name of
Cook upon Weatherby which was a forgery, in order
to obtain part of the money belonging to Cook. This was
in Weatherby's hands, and you have the further evi-
dence that ho employed Fisher to collect Cook's money
and apply it to his own use. It also appears that from
Ceok's death he would become possessed of the horse
Polestar, and you have the evidence of his having fab-
ricated a document which was to be produced, to the
effect that certain bills of exchange on which they were
jointly liable were negotiated for Cook's advantage
only and from which the prisoner clrived no benefit.
was brought forward after Cook's death. If, however,
Cook bad survived, that fraud must have been exposed,
and the prisoner punished. It is said that, with respect
to the joint liability of Cook and Palmer, that by Conk's
death it must all be thrown on him. That was ratkier
a distant object, for is Palmer got possession ofall Cook's
property by this n cans he would not be a sufferer by
his death. As to the important question, whether Cook
might be supposed to have died from natural disease. or
from poison, you have heard the evidence of Sir Ben-
jamin Brodie arid other most honourable and able men
in the profes ion, who said that, in their opinion, he did
not die of natural disease—that they knew of no natural
disease that would account for those symptoms under
which Cook laboured previous to his death ; but, on the
contrary, that they be. ieved that the symptoms de-
scribed were such as might be expected from the use of
strychnine—that, comparing these symptoms with
natural tetanus, they did not correspond, but they did
with those brought on by strychnine. Then with
respect to the statement that no strychniue
was found in the body is one entirely for your
consideration ; but there is no point of law by
I
which poison must be found in the body of a deceased
_ _ . . .

person who has died from the administration of poison ;
and respecting poison not being found in Cook's body by
Professor Taylor and Dr. Rees, who analysed the con-
tents of that part of it which was forwarded to them,
you have witnesses of great reputation, and Dr. Christi-
soa among the numb=r, who stated that under certain
circumstances strychnine cannot be found in the human
body ; and you have the evidence of Professor Taylor
and Dr. Rees, who experimented on animals destroyed by
strychnine, that they were unable to find it in the bodies
of those animals by resorting to the same method of de-
tection that they employed in examining the body of
Cook, and in which no strychnine was found. With re-
Bard to the length of time between the alleged adminis-
tration of the strychnine and the time the symptoms
appeared, the evidence seems to lead to this conclu-ion,
that much depends o❑ the state of the person to whom
it is administered, and the manner in which it is adminis-
tered, but that in many instances a great space of time
occurred between the ingestion of the poison and- death
in human beings than in animals.
Mr. Sergeant Shee—That's not in evidence, my lord.
Lord Campholl—lt was agreed on both sides in the
course of the trial that reference might be made by the
witnesses to known cases of medical writers bearing on
the case, and in the works referred to that principle
was acknowledged, and I therefore ace justified in using

Mr. Sergeant Shoe shook his head.
Lord Campbell—Thera being no blood found in the
heart on the post mortem examination appears to be re-
lied on by the prosecution, and the result is this, that
if death be produced by the obstruction of the respira-
tory organs producing asphyxia, blood is found in the
heart, but if by spasms of the heart it contracts, the
blood is expelled and none is found in it. And the evi-
dence shows that in two instances it has proved to be the
case in the human subject. Under these circumstances
you have to look at the evidence of the prosecution which
goes to show that the prisoner first tampered with
his viotim by administering to him something in his
brandy and water, and in broth, the latter
of which was partaken of by the female Mills, and, ac-
cording to her evidence and that of Lavinia, Barnes, it
produced the same symptoms on her as it did on Cook.

You have evidence of antimony beingfoundinthe&
cetved's body, which shows that tartar emetic, which
produces vomiting, had been a,-Insinistered to him, but
from what source and for what purpose you are to say.
Then you have the evidence that the prisoner procured
strychnia on the Monday and Tuesday nights, but for
what purpose had not been shown; neither had the pri-
soner attempted to impeach the evidence of the
witnesses in respect of it. What was the inten-
tion ? what was the application of it ? No ex-
planation had been given of it, and it was impos-
sible not to pay attention to the conduct of the prisoner
at the bar, in reference to Cook's death, without con-
sidering whether it was such as was consistent with the
conduct of a guilty or an innocent man. He was most
eager that the body should be fastened down in the
coffin, and with regard to the deceased's betting-book
you have evidence from which you may infer that the
betting.book was abstracted by the prisoner. Then, again,
in trying to bribe the postboy to'overturn the fly in which
was the jar containing the parts of the body for analy-
sation, and we might conceive the evidence of his guilt
when we find him tampering with the Postmaster of
Rugeley, and getting him to open a letter from Dr.
Taylor, after he had examined the contents of the jar, to
Mr. Gardiner, the attorney for the prosecution. We
also find the prisoner tampering with the coroner to in-
duce him to procure a verdict from the coroner's jury
that would amount to an acquittal. These are serious
matters fur your consideration, and you, and you alone,
must say what inference is to be drawn from
them. If they are not answered satisfactorily
by the prisoner they present a serious case against him ;
but if you are satisfied that they are, you will, of course,
find that the prosecution has failed to make out its case.
The answer which the prisoner has given to the charge
consists of two parts ; the first consisting of medical
evidence, and the second as to the fact. With regard
to the former, a number of gentlemen of the highest
honour, unsullied integrity, and of profound scientific
knowledge, have come forward with a sincere desire to
speak the truth, and to bring the investigation to a
proper issue ; but it is for you to say whether, from
their manner in the witness-box, either of them had
changed the character of a witness into that of an advo-
cate—for, if so, such conduct was reprehensible in the
extreme. The learned judge then proceeded, and read the
evidence of the defence, commencing withDr.Nunnely's.
It will be recollected that Mr. Nunnely was the person
who discovered the strychnia in the Leeds case, and also
in the body of a person named Waterhouse. He de-
tailed at great length the tests he applied to discover the
strychnia in both cases. In his evidence he further
stated that in the case he bad seen there was not more
than the ordinary amount of rigidity ; and another im-
portant part of the statement of Mr. Nunnely was that
on the post mortem examinations he had invariably
found the heart full after death. This circumstance dif-
_ fern from the state of the heart of Cook, as it was found
empty. At the conclusion of the evidence his lordship
said—l am sure you will give your most serious attention
to the facts mentioned by this witness, as they differ
materially from the medical evidence for the prosecution.
He states there was no more than the ordinary amount
of rigidity after death, and he also attaches great impor-
tance to the heart of Mr. Cook being found empty. I
now come to the evidence given by Mr. Herapath. His
lordship, having read it at length, said—Mr. Herapath
is a skilful chemist, and he differs with Mr.
Nunnely as to the rigidity of the body after
death. In the cases be bad seen the bodies of the
animals were found perfectly rigid, and he also was of
opinion that had strychnine been administered it ought
to have been discovered. But he had given.an opinion
even in this case to the effect that there might have
been strychnine present, and Dr. Taylor and Dr. Rees
might not have taken the proper means to discover it.
But they had it in evidence in the two cases where Dr.
Taylor and Dr. Rees had administered strychnia, to the
animal experimented upon the poison had not been
found. We next have the evidence of Dr. Rogers, a
professor of chemistry in the St. George's School of
Medicine, who bad experimented upon decomposed
animal matter and had discovered the poison, as the jury
would recollect when they heard his evidence read to
them. [His lordship here read the evidence.] Accord-
ing to this evidence, where the strychnia bad been mixed