New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1865-07-29


tend Mrs. Pritchard. One, DR.. Gardner, was
Professor of Medicine in the University Of Gias-
gov. He found his patient excited, and in ter
ror at the idea that lie should leave her. lie
Processes that the case puzzled him. Lie pre-
scribcd-what "NO medicine, no stimulants
nothing but plain boiled egg and Dill ol
Bread" Into an egg or bit of bread, DR.. Card
ner seems to have reasoned, you cannot easily
put poison. But whatever he reasoned OF
thought, his connection with the case ends there'
and he never notified anybody of his suspicious
DR.. James Paterson had different expert
ence. lie was called in February to sec MIS-.
TAYLOR, tho mother, and found her dying, as ne
believed, from a powerful narcotic. In the
same bed with Mrs. Taylor, lay her daughter
Mrs. Pritchard, and DR.. Paterson testihes ne
then was convinced she was under the influence
of anthony. lie goes away and says nothing
week later. he is called to see Mrs. Prltchard'
md finds Mrs. Taylor already dead from inc
noison under which he had before seen her
suffering. Hc il reused to one act Oh Or
binary intelligence--he refuses to certify 10
the cause of Mrs. Taylors death, and writes to
the Registrar that her death was sudden, I'M
expected, and mysterious" Had the Regis
trar in that letter ordered post-mortem ex'
animation of Mrs. Taylor, it would undoubtedly
have saved Mrs. Pritchsrds life, but the Regis.
trar does nothing, and so Dr. Paterson does
nothing. On tho stand and in letter he has
since written, he admitted he believed DIR.
Pritchard had poisoned Mrs. Taylor. and was
poisoning his wife, but be did nothing beyond
write to the Registrar, for two rcasons-it
might not have been safe, and it was clearly
against etiquette for him to interfere! DIR.
Pritchard was q physician; his wife was under
his care; as he did not choose 10 send for DR..
Paterson again, DR.. Paterson saw no occasion
to interfere with any intention he might have
of poisoning wife and wifc's mother both. The
statement may read like sheer or satre-it
is the literal truth; it is DIR. Pater5ons cxplana-
ton of the reasons which induced him to look
on two murders without raising his hand to stay
them. Worse still, Dr. Paterson afrns he
held consultation with ono or two other
physicians Of Glasgow, and they agreed with
him that professional decorun would not
allow him to interpose between DR.. Pritchard
and DR.. Pritchard's wife whom he was poison
ing. lie was sent for again on the 18th March
and found the wife's symptoms tie same, but
terribly aggravated. She was clearly dy-
ing from poison. He prescribed for her,
went away, and neither returned, nor de-
nounced her murderer. he says explicitly: IS
did not 90 back because it was none OF my
business. She had her husband, who was q
medical man. l had discharged my duty"
His "duty" being, in his view, to let this
woman, as no had already let her mother,
DO Inurdcrcd We confess We are utterly
at loss to understand why DR.. Paterson
has not been arrested and tried as an
accessory before the fact to the double murder.
The Judge who tried Pritchard clearly had no
doubt Of Paterson's guilt, in morals if not in
law, for he declared: There is a rule of life
a consideration higher than rule-a duty which
every right-mnded man owes to his neighbor
to prevent the destruction Of human life, and in
that duty cannot but see that Dr. Paterson
failed"
Of ono thing we are sure-that DIR. Pritch-
ards fate on the gallows is far less terrible than
the life which DIR. Paterson must henceforth
lead. If there be man in Great Britain whom
his fellow-me will avoid and whom his profess
sion is bound to covor with execration and
contempt, that man il DR.. Paterson.