Grant County herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1850-1968, 1861-03-07

been for the chemical analysis, the cas-,
would have been dropped there withou
further inquiry. In looking at the eyi
dence before the ceroner's jury, and thai
too before the remains were sent to tho
chemist, the following testimony is given
Samuel H. Case, M. d., sworn, says -"
was present at the examination, this was
after the body had been exhumed,1 to-day
There has nothing come to my knowledge
adequate to produce death, unless it was
the Inflammation of the esophagus and some
of the stomach. was unable to deter
mine what allied her during her sickness. -
| thought attended more to inflammation Of
the stomach towards the close; arrived at
this conclusion negatively because | could
make nothing else of it; don't know that
4 ever saw a case of acute inflammation of
the stomach unless they had, taken some
thing to irritate it: the medicine would not
have produced inflammation; could not see
why the medicine did not operate. There
was no obstruction IN tie bowelssn 1.-THE
italics are my own.
jerks s. Spfague, M. d., sworn says
+" | could discover no visible marks Of dis
ease sufficient to produce death in that
short space of time. There was no indica-
ton of inflammation or modification suf-
ficient to produce death. There aoas no
obstruction Of the boO,Rs; think there
must hare been some mistake about there
hauing been no Indictment Of Tie Jowels."
Horace Lathrop, Jr, NJ D., sworn says
-"Did not see anything in the post-mortem
appearances that would account satisfac-
torily for death. made thorough OK
animation Of the whole intestinal organs of
the boay-discoyered no appearances Of
disease except some slight appearance of
inflammation--no marks ct organic disease
sufficient to produce death; the medicines
given by Di. Case, if they had been re-
tanned, would not have produced death.
Now then the post-mortem examination,
according to the evidence of these
three physicians, shows no constipation Of
the bowels, and had Huldah died Of this
there would have been not only indications
of inflammation, but of modification also
but in the testimony Of DR.. Case, "there
aOas no obstruction Of the boa0ets" DIR.
Sprague says "tbere aoas no obstruction of
tie bowels,' and .hinks there mast hare
been some mistake about there being no
Increment Of tie JoWelS" Dr. Lathrop
also says he "did MT see anything az tie
poSt-mortena appearances that aoo.tEd ac-
count satisfactorily .fosscs.sFPat These
men are too well known to n2sbor thought
in regard to their yeracity. Now then if
Huldah's death was caused simply by a
constipation of the bowels, why was there
no indication Of the fact at the very time
when Mr.. Brunson says it was shown to be
the case?
In regard to bis assumption-for it is
such-that the symptoms showed no ar
senicaI poison whatever beg leave to
differ. There were symptoms Of a char
acter hardly to be mistaken, in regard to
the death Of Huldah and although the at
tendant nurse, Mrs. McCraney, who was
always present whenever DIR. Case called,
would endeavor to draw his attention to
other parts than the actual seat of disease,
yet these symptoms were such as to cause
great anxiety on his part, but hearing such
contradictory accounts of the known effects
of the medicines left by him, he was BAT
fled, as any other physician might be, in
regard to forming an accurate opinion as to
the difficulty existing IN the case of that
unfortunate young lady. But when &c
post-mortem examination showed no real
cause for death aside from poison, then
facts and circumstances all conspired to
show that arsenic had been given, and that
in such minute doses by the mouth, and
in such an unheard-of way, by injections,
that it was difficult to know before death
the nature of the disease, though the symp-
toms we're those of poison. Now then,
Mr.. Editor, do you suppose, in view OF the
above facts, that according to the language
of Mr.. Rrunson, "the case would hav3 been
dropped without further inquiry, had it not
been for the chemical analysis 4" No sir,
the case would have gone before the grand
jury for indictment had there been no other
evidences than those attending the mere
death of the young lady in question, even
though the law requires that arsenic be
found in order to convict them. Again,
ia the same paragraph with the above quo
tation, are these words But as the
ANALYSIS pretended to have found arsenic in
the body. and in syringe which was used
once and only once, the excited imagination
saw in it evidence of foul play" There is
| in this, first, Il thrust at the chemist, which
il made more obvious in the next para
graph and is unworthy Of the position filled
bv the gentleman making it, and another
assumption, or rather an assertion founded
upon no other evidence than that Of the
ecused before the Coroner's jury, which
5s.t;n,,,nv would go but little way in tbs
Mace n establishing the truth in this IN
stance. In regard 10 the analysis made By
DR. Porter Of the AIbaay Medical College
{ was almost universally received as mas
ter-niece Of its kind, and when gwen as
testimony it was matter of surprise how
4 was possible for person to go INTO al
the minntia Of such an analysis, and tina
too without having any notes ormelnoran-
dun III regard to it, before him. while CIV
mo ! description Of the different processes
/ liz, - ls4anf fix